Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016  with  funding  from 
Boston  Library  Consortium  Member  Libraries 


https://archive.org/details/millardfillmorep01fill 


PUBLICATIONS 


OF  THE 

BUFFALO 

HISTORICAL  SOCIETY 


VOLUME  X 


MILLARD  FILLMORE  PAPERS 


1907 


MILLARD  FILLMORE. 


From  the  Portrait  by  B.  f.  Carpenter  Owned  by  the  Ehrich  Galleries,  New  York. 
Published  by  Special  Permission  of  Mr.  Louis  R.  Ehrich. 


PUBLICATIONS 

OF  THE 

BUFFALO 

Historical  Society 

VOLUME  X 

MILLARD  FILLMORE  PAPERS 

VOLUME  ONE 


EDITED  BY 

FRANK  H.  SEVERANCE 

SECRETARY  OF  THE  SOCIETY 


BUFFALO.  NEW  YORK: 

PUBLISHED  BY  THE 

BUFFALO  HISTORICAL  SOCIETY 


1907 


f 

123 
. 6 g 
88  g 
V.l 


Union  and  <Htm*a  llreae 
Sofia  In 


JtQS 


Mesrtw  . ( ""'y 

^.o7  'V 


OFFICERS  OF  THE 


BUFFALO  HISTORICAL  SOCIETY 

1907 


President ANDREW  LANGDON 

Vice-President HON.  HENRY  W.  HILL 

Secretary-Treasurer FRANK  H.  SEVERANCE 


BOARD  OF  MANAGERS 

Term  expiring  January,  1908. 

Albert  H.  Briggs,  M.  D.,  George  B.  Mathews, 

Hon.  Peter  A.  Porter,  Lewis  J.  Bennett, 

Chas.  J.  North. 

Term  expiring  January  1909. 

Robert  W.  Day,  Henry  A.  Richmond, 

Hugh  Kennedy,1  Charles  W.  Goodyear, 

G.  Barrett  Rich. 

Term  expiring  January , 1910. 

Hon.  Henry  W.  Hill,  Henry  R.  Howland, 

J.  N.  Larned,  Charles  R.  Wilson, 

J.  J.  McWilliams. 

Term  expiring  January,  1911. 

Andrew  Langdon,  James  Sweeney, 

Frank  H.  Severance,  George  A.  Stringer, 

Ogden  P.  Letch  worth. 


The  Mayor  of  Buffalo,  the  Corporation  Counsel,  the  Comptroller, 
Superintendent  of  Education,  President  of  the  Board  of  Park  Com- 
missioners, and  President  of  the  Common  Council,  are  also  ex-oMcio 
members  of  the  Board  of  Managers  of  the  Buffalo  Historical  Society. 


1.  Elected  June  6,  1907,  for  the  unexpired  term  of  Joseph  P.  Dudley, 
died  February  14,  1907. 


LIST  OF  THE 


PRESIDENTS  OF  THE  SOCIETY 

FROM  ITS  ORGANIZATION  TO  THE  PRESENT  TIME. 


*Millard  Fillmore, 1862  to  1867 

♦Henry  W.  Rogers, 1868 

*Rev.  Albert  T.  Chester,  D.  D., 1869 

♦Orsamus  H.  Marshall, 1870 

♦Hon.  Nathan  K.  Hall, 1871 

*William  H.  Greene, 1872 

*Orlando  Allen, 1873 

♦Oliver  G.  Steele, 1874 

*Hon.  James  Sheldon, 1875  and  1886 

* Willi  am  C.  Bryant, 1876 

♦Capt.  E.  P.  Dorr, 1877 

Hon.  William  P.  Letchworth, 1878 

William  H.  H.  Newman, 1879  and  1885 

♦Hon.  Elias  S.  Hawley, 1880 

♦Hon.  James  M.  Smith, 1881 

* Willi  am  Hodge, 1882 

♦William  Dana  Fobes, 1883  and  1884 

♦Emmor  Haines, 1887 

♦James  Tillinghast, 1888 

♦' Willi  am  K.  Allen, 1889 

♦George  S.  Hazard, 1890  and  1892 

♦Joseph  C.  Greene,  M.  D., 1891 

♦Julius  H.  Dawes, 1893 

Andrew  Langdon, 1894  to  1907 


Deceased. 


INTRODUCTION 


THE  following  pages  contain  such  of  the  speeches,  debates, 
official  and  private  correspondence,  and  miscellaneous  writ- 
ings of  Millard  Fillmore,  as  the  editor  has  been  able  to  bring 
together,  without  undue  postponement  of  this  publication. 

On  the  evening  of  December  15,  1905,  the  Rev.  William  Elliot 
Griffis,  D.  D.,  addressed  the  Buffalo  Historical  Society  at  one  of  its 
regular  meetings,  his  theme  being  “Millard  Fillmore  and  his  part 
in  the  opening  of  Japan.”  In  1906,  in  revising  his  address  for  pub- 
lication by  the  Buffalo  Historical  Society,  Dr.  Griffis  announced  his 
purpose  of  collecting  material  for  a biography  of  Mr.  Fillmore,  and 
solicited  the  cooperation  especially  of  those  who  had  personally 
known  him.  Certain  reminiscences  were  therefore  prepared,  with 
a view  to  including  them  as  an  appendix  in  the  volume  containing 
Dr.  Griffis’  paper.  It  was  soon  perceived,  however,  that  the  best 
service  that  could  be  rendered,  preliminary  to  the  preparation  of  any 
adequate  biography  of  Millard  Fillmore,  was  to  bring  together  as 
fully  as  possible,  his  own  words,  as  found  in  speeches,  correspond- 
ence, official  or  personal  utterance  of  whatever  sort. 

This,  then,  was  the  purpose  which  has  brought  about  the  present 
collection.  The  editor  is  under  no  illusion  as  to  its  completeness.  So 
far  as  Mr.  Fillmore’s  utterances  in  official  life  are  concerned,  there 
are  for  the  most  part  official  records  to  turn  to,  and  these  have  been 
faithfully  gleaned.  But  of  his  personal  correspondence,  there  appar- 
ently exists  nowhere  any  considerable  collection;  and  though  the 
editor  has  prosecuted  his  search  in  many  places,  and  through  the 
obliging  courtesy  of  many  individual  owners,  and  many  custodians 
of  institutions,  has  brought  together  a considerable  body  of  material, 
it  is  obviously  impossible  to  assert  that  nothing  of  importance 
remains  undiscovered. 

Partisan  abuse  and  misrepresentation  have  been  the  lot  of  every 
President  of  the  United  States  since  Washington;  but  no  President 
has  been  more  maligned  in  his  time,  or  in  some  respects  more  mis- 
represented, both  in  his  own  day  and  in  after  years,  than  has  Millard 
Fillmore.  In  the  passion  of  contemporary  criticism,  this  was  but 


VI 


INTRODUCTION. 


natural.  But  now  the  time  has  arrived  when  judgments  may  be 
revised,  and  the  historian’s  quest  for  truth  pursued  in  calm  temper 
and  impartial  mood.  Towards  such  an  end,  the  documents  and 
speeches  here  printed,  as  matter  of  convenient  record,  may  prove 
a helpful  contribution. 

No  adequate  biography  of  Millard  Fillmore  has  yet  been  written. 
Several  books  devoted  to  his  career  appeared  in  1856,  when  he  was 
the  candidate  of  the  American  party.  In  all  of  these  exist  faults 
inherent  in  partisan  work.  Mr.  Fillmore’s  span  of  life  continued 
for  eighteen  years  after  they  appeared,  and  although  his  public 
career  was  ended,  he  was  by  no  means  an  indifferent  or  silent 
spectator  of  public  affairs.  To  those  who  would  know  his  character, 
his  attitude  during  the  Civil  War,  and  his  well-considered  utter- 
ances on  many  topics  in  his  later  years,  cannot  be  ignored. 

The  material  gathered  in  these  volumes  will  not  in  any  wise  take 
the  place  of  the  thorough,  dispassionate  study  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  part 
in  American  history  which  is  his  due.  But  it  is  a contribution — 
an  indispensable  contribution — toward  such  a study.  It  is  fitting, 
too,  that  such  a record  should  be  made  by  the  Buffalo  Historical 
Society,  which  owes  to  his  memory  all  the  recognition  it  can  give. 
He  was  largely  instrumental  in  founding  the  Society,  was  its  first 
president,  and  several  times  reelected  to  that  office;  and  was  active 
in  its  behalf  from  the  day  it  was  formed  until  his  death.  He  drew 
to  it  as  well  the  interest  and  help  of  the  representative  men  and 
women  of  Buffalo.  A service  in  which  he  was  especially  active  was 
to  induce  the  elderly  people  of  Western  New  York,  those  who  had 
shared  in  the  pioneer  and  war-time  experiences  of  Buffalo  in  its 
days  of  beginning,  to  write  down  their  recollections;  and  he  thus 
began  the  manuscript  collections  which  have  since  been  drawn  on 
with  profit  for  the  Publications  of  the  Society. 

Since  his  death,  many  articles  formerly  belonging  to  Mr. 
Fillmore,  or  his  family,  have  come  into  the  possession  of  the  Society. 
Among  these  are  his  desk,  an  inkstand,  a gold  pen — one  which  he 
is  known  to  have  used  for  many  years,  and  which  may  be  the  verita- 
ble one  with  which  he  penned  his  most  important  state  papers,  or 
signed  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act — and  especially  many  of  his  books  and 
some  of  his  manuscripts. 

The  destruction  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  papers,  by  the  executors  of 
his  son’s  estate,  has  been  noted  in  connection  with  Dr.  Griffis’  paper. 
(Publications,  Buffalo  Historical  Society,  Vol.  IX,  p.  65.)  The 
facts,  briefly  restated,  are,  that  Millard  Powers  Fillmore,  the  Presi- 
dent’s only  son,  directed  in  his  will  that  his  executor  “at  the  earliest 


INTRODUCTION. 


Vll 


practicable  moment  . . . burn  or  otherwise  effectively  destroy  all 

correspondence  or  letters  to  or  from  my  father,  mother,  sister  or  me,” 
and  this  was  done,  soon  after  the  son’s  death  in  1889.  President 
Fillmore’s  will  contained  no  clause  directing  or  even  suggesting  the 
destruction  of  his  papers.  On  one  occasion,  when  visited  at  his 
Buffalo  home  by  Gen.  James  Grant  Wilson,  Mr.  Fillmore  had  pointed 
to  a cabinet  of  papers  in  his  library  and  remarked  to  his  visitor: 
“In  those  cases  can  be  found  every  important  letter  and  document 
which  I received  during  my  administration,  and  which  will  enable 
the  future  historian  or  biographer  to  prepare  an  authentic  account 
of  that  period  of  our  country’s  history.”  These  papers  included  cor- 
respondence with  Henry  Clay,  with  Daniel  Webster,  Edward  Everett 
and  other  members  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  Cabinet,  and  many  other  dis- 
tinguished contemporaries ; as  well  as  copies  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  let- 
ters, on  many  topics  of  vital  importance,  with  very  many  persons. 
So  far  as  known,  none  of  these  papers  now  exist. 

The  loss  of  this  material  is  in  large  measure  irreparable  to  the 
cause  of  history.  To  do  what  it  can,  to  offset  the  loss,  the  present 
collection  is  offered.  And  here  is  a striking  thing:  The  more  we 

find  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  correspondence,  the  less  occasion  can  be  dis- 
covered for  its  concealment  or  destruction.  If  ever  a man  held 
steadfast  to  the  dictates  of  conscience,  in  the  discharge  of  public 
duty,  that  man  was  Millard  Fillmore.  His  memory  and  his  repu- 
tation apparently  have  everything  to  gain,  and  nothing  to  lose,  by  the 
fullest  possible  publication  of  his  views,  especially  as  expressed  in 
his  confidential  correspondence. 


Mr.  Fillmore’s  autobiography  of  his  early  years,  written  in  his 
old  age  and  committed  under  seal  to  the  keeping  of  the  Buffalo  His- 
torical Society  until  he  should  have  passed  away,  has  been  deemed 
the  most  fitting  introduction  for  this  collection.  There  is  no  obvious 
reason  why  it  should  have  been  made  a sealed  document,  except  that 
the  writer  had  reached  a time  of  life  when  publicity  was  shunned 
rather  than  courted.  The  narrative  was  penned  in  the  same  spirit 
that  had  impelled  him  to  solicit  similar  memoirs  from  others,  that 
certain  facts  connected  with  Buffalo’s  early  years  might  not  be  lost. 
But  Mr.  Fillmore’s  sketch  of  himself  virtually  ends  with  his  entrance 
upon  public  life.  Had  he  chosen  to  continue  his  memoirs,  through 
his  terms  of  service  in  the  New  York  Legislature  and  in  Congress, 
how  useful  a record  would  they  prove  to  the  student  of  those  times ! 
But  something  of  his  part  in  affairs,  and  a great  deal  of  his  charac- 


INTRODUCTION. 


viii 

teristics,  may  be  gathered  from  the  record  of  his  participation  in 
legislation. 

By  what  process,  among  Judge  Wood’s  law-books,  was  awakened 
the  ambition  for  a public  career,  or  to  what  suggestion  was  due  the 
impulse  that  made  the  ill-trained  country  boy  strive  for  distinction, 
can  no  more  be  specified  than  any  other  subtle  manifestation  of  the 
laws  of  growth.  Ill-trained  he  surely  was;  with  certain  deficiencies 
of  education  which  he  never  wholly  overcame.  But  that  there  was 
“something  to  him,”  even  as  a youth,  is  equally  certain.  It  is  not 
every  boy  of  twenty-one  who  feels  qualified  to  make  the  Fourth  of 
July  speech  in  his  village ; but  such  was  young  Fillmore’s  first  public 
address,  at  the  Independence  Day  celebration  in  Montville  in  1821. 
No  record  of  this  speech  is  known  to  exist;  and  although  Mr. 
Fillmore’s  after-estimate  of  it  was  that  it  “had  no  merit,”1  the  effort 
is  still  of  the  sort  to  prejudice  favorably  the  impartial  student  of  his 
career. 

Certain  incidents  connected  with  his  early  years  of  school- 
teaching, when  he  took  his  pay  in  wheat,  are  preserved  in  his  let- 
ters ; but  there  is  little  to  build  on  until  after  his  removal  to  Buffalo, 
on  Mayday,  1830.  He  had  already  served  in  the  Legislature,  if  not 
with  distinction,  at  least  with  discretion,  intelligence  and  fidelity.  It 
was  entirely  natural  that  he  should  be  called  on  in  December,  1831, 
as  one  of  a committee  of  eighteen  residents  of  Buffalo,  who  were 
charged  with  the  important  commission  of  drawing  up  a new  charter 
for  Buffalo,  or  amending  the  old  one.  The  result  of  their  labors 
was  an  application  to  the  Legislature  for  an  Act  of  Incorporation, 
which  became  a law  April  20,  1832,  and  signalized  the  birth  of 
Buffalo  as  a city. 


Both  in  Congress  and  out  of  it,  in  these  active  early  years,  Mr. 
Fillmore  was  industrious  in  promoting  the  welfare  of  his  home  city. 
Scarcely  a public  enterprise  was  afoot,  but  his  name  is  found  in 
connection  with  it.  Note  has  been  made  of  his  share  in  drafting 
the  first  city  charter.  In  those  ante-railway  days,  the  harbor  was 
Buffalo’s  one  great  interest  and  its  improvement  was  a perpetual 
aim.  In  the  House,  January  31,  1835,  on  motion  of  Mr.  Fillmore, 
it  was 

Resolved,  That  the  Committee  on  Roads  and  Canals  be  instructed 
to  enquire  into  the  expediency  of  causing  a survey  to  be  made  of  the 
best  mode  of  enlarging  and  improving  the  harbor  of  Buffalo  for 
the  reception  and  security  of  vessels  navigating  Lake  Erie. 


1.  See  the  Autobiography  in  this  volume,  p.  13. 


INTRODUCTION. 


IX 


A great  question  in  Buffalo  in  1835  was  the  enlargement  of  the 
Erie  Canal.  A Citizens’  Meeting  was  held  at  the  Court  House,  Sep- 
tember 30th,  at  which  resolutions  endorsing  the  projected  enlarge- 
ment were  adopted;  and  a standing  committee,  of  which  “Millerd” 
Fillmore  was  a member,  was  appointed  to  act  as  a committee  of  cor- 
respondence, “to  adopt  and  use  the  most  efficient  means  in  behalf  of 
the  citizens  of  Buffalo,  to  promote  the  objects  of  this  meeting.” 

Later  in  the  same  year — in  December — another  meeting  of  Buf- 
falo citizens  adopted  resolutions  remonstrating  against  any  exten- 
sion of  the  city  limits  and  providing  committees  to  consider  and 
report  on  various  local  matters.  Mr.  Fillmore  was  a member  of  a 
committee  to  which  was  referred  “the  present  and  contemplated 
obstructions  in  the  Niagara  river,  and  the  connection  of  the  harbor 
of  Buffalo  creek  with  Black  Rock,”  his  associates  on  the  committee 
being  Samuel  Wilkeson,  chairman,  Charles  Townsend,  P.  A.  Barker 
and  R.  B.  Heacock. 

Mr.  Fillmore’s  name — this  time  printed  “Filmore” — is  one  of  a 
score  or  more  appended  to  a call  for  a “publick  meeting  at  the 
Farmer’s  Hotel”  on  the  evening  of  December  3,  1835,  “to  discuss 
the  measures  adopted  at  a meeting  of  a few  of  our  citizens  on 
Saturday  evening  last,  and  other  objects  and  movements  connected 
therewith,  which  are  calculated  to  divert  our  business  from  its  nat- 
ural channel,  or  unite  our  DESTINY  with,  or  transfer  our  COM- 
MERCE to  Black  Rock.”  A poster  proclaiming  this  “Crisis,”  with 
the  signers’  names  in  bold  type,  is  one  of  the  relics  preserved  by 
the  Buffalo  Historical  Society. 

In  yet  other  ways  Mr.  Fillmore  served  Buffalo.  In  April,  1835, 
he  was  appointed  by  the  Common  Council  “to  assess  $2200  on  prop- 
erty benefited  by  working  and  grading  Delaware  street,  from  Tupper 
street  to  North  street”;  also,  at  various  times,  to  assess  $300  on 
property  benefited  “by  working  and  gravelling  East  Genesee  street, 
from  Main  street  to  the  easterly  bounds  of  the  city” ; again,  to  assess 
$680  on  Oak,  from  Genesee  to  Goodell ; $210  for  grading  Commercial 
street,  widening  Tan  alley,  Tupper  street  and  opening  Norton  street, 
opening  Tupper  and  Washington  streets,  etc.  There  is  no  question 
as  to  his  intimate  identification  with  the  growing  town. 

A more  notable  service  was  in  connection  with  the  famous  Rath- 
bun  failure,  some  note  of  which  will  be  found  on  a subsequent  page. 
In  August,  1836,  Benjamin  Rathbun  assigned  all  of  his  large  prop- 
erty to  Hiram  Pratt,  Lewis  F.  Allen,  Joseph  Clary,  Thomas  C.  Love 
and  Millard  Fillmore.  The  schedules  of  Rathbun’s  real  estate 
showed  a valuation  of  $2,237,150,  and  of  his  personal  property  of 


X 


INTRODUCTION. 


$854,500.  It  was  all  vastly  over-estimated,  the  personal  property 
finally  realizing  $115,000.  Messrs.  Fillmore  and  Love  resigned  as 
assignees  before  the  estate  was  settled.  Mr.  Fillmore’s  sketch  of 
Joseph  Clary,  in  pages  following,  shows  how  heavy  the  burden  of 
the  Rathbun  interests  fell  on  that  worthy  and  devoted  citizen. 


During  his  last  year  in  the  Legislature  Mr.  Fillmore  had  origi- 
nated the  tax  law  to  tax  debts  due  to  non-resident  debtors.  He  had 
the  bill  reported  and  made  every  exertion  to  bring  it  before  the 
Assembly,  but  as  it  came  from  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means, 
which  had  charge  of  all  financial  matters,  it  was  reported  too  late 
to  receive  the  action  of  the  House  that  session.  The  next  year  the 
subject  was  renewed  and  the  same  bill  became  a law.  The  Buffalo 
Commercial  Advertiser  of  October  25,  1836,  commenting  on  it,  said: 
“It  divided  the  burdens  of  taxation  with  the  people  of  this  county, 
and  gave  them  the  only  substantial  relief  they  have  felt  from  this 
load  of  evils.” 

On  March  30,  1836,  a convention  was  held  in  Buffalo,  made  up  of 
delegates  from  twenty-five  towns  in  Erie,  Chautauqua,  Genesee  and 
Niagara  counties,  comprised  in  the  Holland  Purchase,  “to  resist  the 
unjust  oppression  of  the  late  purchasers  of  the  Holland  Company, 
in  exacting  an  additional  price,  beyond  that  expressed  in  the  con- 
tract, from  all  those  unfortunate  settlers  on  the  Holland  Purchase 
who  are  unable  to  make  prompt  payment.”  Jacob  LeRoy  and 
Heman  J.  Redfield  had  acquired  certain  rights  of  the  Holland  Land 
Company,  and  it  was  against  their  attempts  to  enforce  contracts 
that  the  settlers  rebelled.  On  March  5th,  of  this  same  year,  a “large 
and  respectable  meeting”  of  settlers  had  been  held  at  John 
Dunham’s  tavern  in  the  town  of  Clarence,  at  which  Millard  Fillmore 
and  four  others  were  appointed  a committee  to  arrange  for  a fur- 
ther meeting.  Mr.  Fillmore  evidently  wrote  the  call  for  that  meet- 
ing— at  any  rate  it  “sounds  like  him” — and  his  name  stands  first 
of  the  five  which  were  signed  to  it.  It  was  published  in  all  the 
newspapers  of  the  Holland  Purchase,  and  the  above  quotation  is  a 
part  of  it.  The  second  meeting,  as  above  stated,  was  held  in  Buf- 
falo. Dyre  Tillinghast  presided,  Millard  Fillmore  was  one  of  the 
eighteen  Buffalo  delegates,  and  drafted  and  presented  the  follow- 
ing, one  of  a long  series  of  resolutions  adopted  by  the  meeting: 

Resolved , That  the  law  taxing  debts  due  to  non-residents,  is  in 
the  opinion  of  this  convention,  a just  and  equitable  law,  and  should 
by  no  means  be  repealed,  and  that  members  of  Assembly  and  Sena- 


INTRODUCTION. 


XI 


tors  from  the  western  part  of  New  York,  be  respectfully  requested 
to  oppose  any  attempt  to  repeal  said  law. 

That  his  service  in  the  Legislature  had  drawn  especial  attention 
to  him  is  shown  repeatedly  in  the  files  of  the  State  papers  of  that 
period.  In  1836  it  had  become  a saying — so  wrote  a correspondent 
of  the  Buffalo  Commercial  Advertiser — “Fillmore  says  it’s  right — 
we’ll  go  it.” 

In  the  old  files  of  Buffalo  newspapers  some  trace  is  found  both 
of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  early  private  business  and  his  political  advance- 
ment. In  the  30’s  he  was  a director  of  the  old  Buffalo  Mutual  Fire 
Insurance  Company;  and  in  1836,  in  addition  to  his  various  interests, 
he  added  life  insurance,  as  the  following  advertisement  ( Commercial 
Advertiser,  February  13,  1836)  testifies: 

Life  Insurance. — The  subscriber  has  been  appointed  Agent  for 
Life  Insurance,  by  the  New  York  Life  Insurance  and  Trust  Com- 
pany, and  will  effect  Insurance  upon  Lives  with  said  Company,  on 
application  at  his  office. 

All  persons  having  running  policies  with  said  Company,  through 
the  agency  of  H.  Morris,  Esq.,  the  former  Agent  in  this  city,  upon 
which  premiums  are  now  due,  are  requested  to  pay  the  same  at  the 
law  office  of  Fillmore,  Hall  & Haven,  No.  304  Main  street,  Buffalo. 

M.  Fillmore. 

In  the  meantime,  we  find  him  sustaining  many  pleasant  and  hon- 
orable relations  in  his  home  community.  On  September  2,  1840,  Mr. 
Fillmore  was  chairman  of  a meeting  of  the  Erie  County  bar  which 
adopted  resolutions  thanking  the  Hon.  Philo  Gridley  “for  the  dig- 
nified and  impartial  manner  in  which  he  has  presided  at  the  present 
Circuit  in  this  county.”  Judge  Gridley  had  attended  the  Erie  Cir- 
cuit to  dispose  of  business  which  had  accumulated  during  an  illness 
of  Judge  Dayton,  and  had  disposed  of  a calendar  of  279  cases,  “most 
of  which  were  seriously  litigated,”  adds  Mr.  Fillmore  in  the  resolu- 
tions which  bear  his  signature.  Mr.  Fillmore  named  a committee 
who  should  invite  the  judge  “to  partake  of  a public  dinner,”  but 
this  honor  was  declined. 

In  Buffalo  in  the  early  ’40’s  the  Mechanics’  Association  was  an 
intellectual  center;  and  here  we  find  Mr.  Fillmore,  on  the  evening 
of  December  29,  1843,  lecturing  on  “Promissory  Notes  and  Bills  of 
Exchange” — hardly  a sensational  subject,  but  no  doubt  practical. 
On  December  29,  1845,  and  January  7,  1846,  he  lectured  on  “The 
General  Powers  taken  from  the  States  and  vested  in  the  United 
States.”  No  record  or  report  of  these  addresses  is  known.  Mr. 
Fillmore  was  a member  of  the  Buffalo  Horticultural  Society,  and  in 


Xll 


INTRODUCTION. 


1845,  at  its  annual  exhibition,  a member  of  the  committee  on  flowers  ’r 
but  that  he  had  any  special  taste  for  flowers  is  not  known.  On 
June  24,  1845,  with  other  citizens,  he  signed  a call  for  a public  meet- 
ing at  the  Court  House,  “to  take  action  on  the  death  of  General 
Jackson” ; and  about  this  time  we  find  new  evidences  of  his  business 
interests.  In  July,  1845,  with  others,  he  signed  a public  card  rec- 
ommending the  Great  Western  Railroad  securities  as  good  invest- 
ment. In  October  of  that  year  he  was  one  of  a committee  to  promote 
the  affairs  of  the  Niagara  & Detroit  Rivers  Railroad  projected  “from 
Bertie  on  the  Niagara  to  Windsor  on  the  Detroit.” 


He  was  in  earlier  years,  a devoted  worker  for  his  political  party. 
At  the  “Harrison”  State  convention,  held  at  Albany,  February  4, 
1836,  Millard  Fillmore  and  Lewis  F.  Allen  were  delegates  from  Erie 
county,  and  Mr.  Fillmore  was  a vice-president  of  the  convention. 
He  was  one  of  the  committee  delegated  (February,  1836)  to  notify 
Francis  Granger  of  his  nomination  for  Vice-President. 

In  November,  1837,  he  headed  a letter  to  Squire  S.  Case,  asking 
him  to  withdraw  his  name  from  the  canvass  as  a candidate  for 
Member  of  Assembly.  Mr.  Fillmore’s  intervention  was  in  the 
interest  of  an  undivided  Whig  vote.  Now,  after  ten  years  of  strife, 
the  Whig  party  was  dominant,  and  carried  the  State.  At  the  Whig 
celebration  in  Aurora,  November  22d,  the  following  toast  was  drunk: 
“Millard  Fillmore,  our  Representative  in  Congress.  The  favorite 
son  of  Western  New  York.  His  abilities  and  integrity  ought  to  and 
will  be  known  and  felt  throughout  the  whole  of  the  Empire  State.” 

Mr.  Fillmore  was  chosen,  August  30,  1838,  a delegate  to  the 
Whig  State  convention.  It  met  at  Utica,  September  12th,  Hugh 
Maxwell  presiding.  Mr.  Fillmore  was  made  a member  of  the  com- 
mittee on  resolutions  and  addresses.  William  H.  Seward  was  nomi- 
nated for  Governor,  and  “the  convention  was  addressed  thrillingly”1 
by  Millard  Fillmore;  but  no  detailed  report  of  his  speech  is  found. 

On  October  nth  of  that  year  Mr.  Fillmore  was  renominated  by 
the  Democratic  Whig  convention  for  Representative  and  on  Novem- 
ber 6th  was  reelected,  receiving  5414  votes  against  2831  for  George 
P.  Barker.  The  head  of  the  ticket,  Seward,  received  in  the  same 
district  (Erie  county)  but  3448  votes.  There  was  no  question  as  to 
Mr.  Fillmore’s  popularity.  He  was  supported  for  Speaker  in  the 
Whig  caucus  preliminary  to  the  organization  of  the  House  at  the 
extra  session  of  1841,  by  the  Whigs  of  the  New  York  delegation. 


1.  Albany  Evening  Journal. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Xllt 


and  received  the  next  highest  number  of  votes  to  John  White  of 
Kentucky,  who  was  nominated  and  elected  Speaker.  Following  the 
practice  usual  in  such  cases,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  given  the  chairman- 
ship of  the  Finance  Committee. 

In  June,  1842,  Clay  for  President  and  Fillmore  for  Vice-President 
was  a strongly-advocated  ticket.  The  Poughkeepsie  Eagle,  June 
18th,  “spread  this  banner  to  the  breeze,”  using  Mr.  Fillmore’s  name 
without  consulting  him,  and  commending  him  for  the  certainty  of 
his  principles,  and  his  political  resemblance  to  Mr.  Clay. 

At  the  great  Whig  meeting  in  New  York  City,  October  6,  1842, 
the  following  was  adopted: 

Resolved,  That  Millard  Fillmore  and  his  Whig  colleagues  in 
Congress,  by  the  ability,  fidelity  and  zeal,  with  which  they  have 
sustained  and  promoted  the  true  interests  of  the  country,  have  richly 
merited  the  commendation  which  their  constituents  are  pronounc- 
ing, of  “Well  done,  good  and  faithful  servants!”  and  their  honest, 
patient  and  ultimately  successful  struggles  against  extensive  fac- 
tiousness and  unparalleled  treachery  will  long  be  remembered  with 
gratitude  by  the  people. 

The  Whigs  of  Buffalo  naturally  felt  called  upon  to  express  their 
appreciation  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  efforts  in  behalf  of  a revised  tariff. 
On  the  evening  of  September  13,  1842,  a great  meeting  was  held  in 
the  Court  House  Park — the  Court  House  itself  proving  too  small 
for  the  occasion.  Complimentary  resolutions  were  adopted  and  a 
committee  sent  to  inform  Mr.  Fillmore  and  invite  his  attendance  at 
the  meeting.  In  response,  says  the  Commercial  Advertiser's  report 
of  the  occasion,  “Mr.  Fillmore  rose  and  addressed  the  meeting  in  a 
masterly  manner  upwards  of  an  hour,  giving  with  great  clearness 
and  ability  the  history  of  the  late  session,  and  lucidly  explaining 
the  many  and  great  obstacles  which  the  majority  had  to  encounter 
from  the  combined  action  of  the  Loco  Focos  and  the  peculiar 
friends  of  the  President,  and  the  President’s  himself,  in  their  efforts 
to  enact  such  laws  as  were  imperiously  demanded  by  the  necessities 
of  the  country.”  No  other  report  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  address  on  this 
occasion  is  found.  Before  adjournment,  the  meeting  adopted  a long 
series  of  resolutions,  thanking  Mr.  Fillmore  and  his  associates  for 
their  services  in  the  passage  of  the  tariff  law ; condemning  President 
Tyler  as  “vacillating  and  dishonest,  incompetent  as  a statesman, 
unfaithful  as  a politician,  and  false  and  dishonest  as  a man  and 
gentleman”;  and  the  assemblage  wound  up,  as  was  frequently  the 
case  at  this  period,  with  enthusiastic  cheers  for  Fillmore  and  Henry 
Clay. 


XIV 


INTRODUCTION. 


At  the  Erie  County  Whig  convention  in  Buffalo,  October  6,  1842, 
Mr.  Fillmore  was  renominated  and  acknowledged  the  honor  by 
addressing  the  convention  at  length,  thanking  them  for  their  renewed 
expression  of  confidence,  but  appealing  to  his  friends  in  phrases  that 
could  not  be  misunderstood,  to  consult  his  wishes  and  excuse  him 
from  being  a candidate.  While  he  was,  therefore,  obviously,  the 
first  choice  of  the  convention  of  ’42,  his  name  was  not  voted  on, 
and  William  A.  Moseley  received  a unanimous  nomination  as  his 
successor. 

Not  being  himself  a candidate  in  the  ensuing  campaign,  Mr. 
Fillmore  felt  at  liberty  to  share  in  the  work  as  a speaker.  There  are 
references  in  the  newspapers  of  the  time  to  numerous  speeches  made 
at  this  period  in  Buffalo;  at  Alden,  on  November  1st,  where  he  is 
said  to  have  addressed  the  meeting  for  nearly  three  hours ; and  at 
other  county  towns,  where  he  gave  such  help  to  the  ticket  as  no  one 
but  him  could  give.  But  for  the  most  part,  no  verbatim  record  of 
these  speeches  is  preserved. 

In  November,  1843,  the  Buffalo  Commercial  Advertiser  (Whig) 
put  up  the  ticket  of  “Clay  and  Fillmore,”  “subject  to  the  decision 
of  the  National  convention.”  In  January,  1844,  the  Clay  Club  of 
Buffalo  was  formed,  which  adopted  an  elaborate  constitution  and 
pledged  its  support  to  the  Clay-Fillmore  ticket.  Similar  clubs  in 
other  towns  did  the  same;  and  the  Democratic  Whig  General  Com- 
mittee of  New  York  City  adopted  resolutions  strongly  endorsing 
Mr.  Fillmore  for  Vice-President.  Though  defeated  in  the  conven- 
tion he  worked  loyally  for  the  success  of  the  ticket. 

In  September,  1844,  he  was  nominated  by  the  Whig  New  York 
State  convention  for  Governor.  He  was  regarded  as  a strong  can- 
didate. It  was  the  Albany  Evening  Journal  which  at  the  close  of 
the  convention,  formulated  a eulogy  of  Mr.  Fillmore,  with  unquali- 
fied praise  of  his  career  and  character,  which  was  reprinted  and 
echoed  in  every  Whig  newspaper  of  the  country.  “Mr.  Fillmore,” 
wrote  Mr.  Weed  on  this  occasion,  “has  secured  this  high  place  in 
the  regard  of  his  fellow-citizens  by  a faithful  devotion  of  his  time 
and  talents  really  and  truly  to  their  service.  He  has  been  some 
fourteen  years  in  the  legislatures  of  the  State  and  Union,  where  his 
voice  and  votes  have  ever  been  heard  and  recorded  for  right  meas- 
ures”— and  much  more  in  the  same  strain.  But  Mr.  Fillmore  was 
defeated,  receiving  a total  vote  of  231,057,  against  241,090  for  Silas 
Wright. 

In  September,  1846,  although  he  had  publicly  declared  his  inten- 
tion not  to  become  a candidate  again,  his  friends  put  forward  his 


INTRODUCTION. 


XV 


name  for  the  same  office.  He  had  not  been  before  the  public  for 
two  years,  having  devoted  himself  wholly  in  this  period  to  the 
practice  of  his  profession ; but  at  the  Utica  convention,  on  September 
23d,  1846,  on  the  first  informal  ballot  for  Governor,  Mr.  Fillmore 
received  65  votes  to  44  for  John  Young,  of  Livingston  county.  It 
was  a splendid  compliment,  since  it  must  have  been  known  in  the 
convention  that  Mr.  Fillmore’s  mind  was  thoroughly  made  up.  Had 
he  chosen  to  reenter  the  field,  it  seems  probable  that  he  could  have 
had  the  nomination,  which,  in  that  year,  would  have  been  equivalent 
to  an  election.  Refusing,  however,  to  be  considered  a candidate,  his 
name  was  dropped  and  Mr.  Young  was  nominated  on  the  third 
ballot.  On  October  1st,  when  the  Whigs  of  Buffalo  assembled  in 
the  Court  House  to  ratify  the  State  ticket,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  fore- 
most in  speaking  in  Mr.  Young’s  behalf  and  in  giving  his  support 
to  the  ticket.  In  the  resolutions  adopted  by  this  meeting  occurs  the 
following: 

Resolved,  That  we  have  an  abiding  confidence  in  our  distin- 
guished fellow-citizen  Millard  Fillmore ; we  believe  he  is  fitted  to 
add  luster  to  any  office  in  the  gift  of  the  people;  we  honor  him  as 
father  of  the  tariff  of  ’42,  and  we  believe  that  we  can  not  now  show 
him  a greater  kindness  than  by  joining  with  him  in  a hearty  support 
of  John  Young,  his  distinguished  Whig  colleague  in  the  ever  memor- 
able and  patriotic  Twenty-seventh  Congress. 

Before  the  long  list  of  resolutions,  of  which  the  foregoing  is  a 
part,  was  submitted  to  the  meeting  for  adoption,  Mr.  Fillmore 
spoke  at  length.  The  only  known  report  of  these  remarks  is  the 
following  synopsis  printed  in  the  Buffalo  Commercial  Advertiser  of 
October  2d : 

Before  the  adoption  of  the  resolutions,  Hon.  Millard  Fillmore 
took  occasion  to  say  that  he  gave  his  entire  concurrence  in  the  nomi- 
nations which  had  been  made,  and  that  they  should  receive  his  hearty 
support.  Feeling  that  he  had  devoted  himself  long  enough  to  public 
life,  and  that  he  must  either  relinquish  his  profession  or  his  political 
position,  he  had  chosen  the  latter  and  had  steadily  declined  being 
a candidate  for  the  office  of  Governor,  and  had  consequently  felt  it 
his  duty  so  to  state  in  the  public  prints. 

He  heartily  rejoiced  in  the  nominations  which  had  been  made, 
and  would  ask  every  friend  who  heard  him  or  to  whom  his  words 
might  extend,  to  join  with  him  in  the  most  strenuous  exertions  to 
secure  their  triumphant  election.  Mr.  Fillmore  than  reviewed  the 
acts  of  the  General  Government,  remarking  upon  the  fulfillment  of 
the  predictions  made  at  the  last  presidential  campaign  in  case  Henry 
Clay  were  defeated,  and  then  asked  who  was  desirous  for  a continu- 
ance of  the  present  state  of  things.  The  time  he  thought  was  come 
for  a glorious  change.  Even  dark  New  Hampshire,  the  last  resting 


XVI 


INTRODUCTION. 


place  of  Loco  Focoism,  had  been  illuminated  with  Whig  lights;  it 
was  burnt  again  in  Maine  and  Indiana,  and  New  York  must  not  be 
behind  her  to  guide  our  beloved  State  from  the  darkness  which 
now  surrounds  her  into  the  noon-day  of  a Whig  triumph. 

Mr.  Fillmore  had  known  Mr.  Young  in  the  public  councils  of  the 
state  and  nation.  He  had  ample  opportunity  to  know  him  in  the 
trying  period  of  the  memorable  Whig  Congress  which  enacted  the 
tariff  of  ’4 2,  and  he  knew  no  man  more  worthy  of  confidence.  He 
trusted  in  his  purity — he  confided  in  his  patriotism.  After  a few 
remarks  in  relation  to  the  Harbor  Veto,  in  which  he  stated  that  in 
his  opinion  the  Constitution  was  not  a salt  water  animal,  but  could 
live  as  well  in  fresh  as  in  salt  water,  and  was  worthy  of  respect 
by  sea  and  land,  Mr.  Fillmore  took  his  seat  amid  prolonged  expres- 
sions of  gratification  from  his  hearers.  The  resolutions  were  then 
unanimously  adopted. 

On  May  19,  1847,  the  Whigs  of  New  York  State  held  a conven- 
tion at  Syracuse  for  the  nomination  of  four  judges  and  a clerk  of 
the  Court  of  Appeals,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  present  as  a delegate, 
was  a member  of  the  committee  on  conference,  and  took  an  active 
part  in  the  proceedings.  In  the  informal  ballot  for  candidate  for 
judge,  Mr.  Fillmore  received  eight  votes,  although,  apparently,  it 
was  known  that  his  name  was  not  seriously  to  be  considered.  The 
convention  chose  Messrs.  Frederick  Whittlesey,  Marcus  T.  Reynolds, 
B.  Davis  Noxon  and  Daniel  Lord,  Mr.  Lord  subsequently  declining 
to  accept,  and  Ambrose  L.  Jordon  being  nominated  instead. 


Mr.  Fillmore  entered  Congress  in  1833,  serving  one  term;  then 
was  out  one  term;  then  again  elected  and  served  six  years,  making 
eight  in  all.  He  was  generally  in  the  minority — and,  of  course, 
chairman  of  no  committee — until  1841,  when  the  memorable  Twenty- 
seventh  Congress  assembled,  having  a large  Whig  majority.  In  this 
Congress,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  made  chairman  of  the  House  Committee 
of  Ways  and  Means,  thus  becoming  leader  of  the  House,  a position 
in  which,  all  things  considered,  he  gained,  if  not  his  highest  honors, 
at  least  his  highest  regard  in  the  opinions  of  all  of  his  countrymen. 
Later,  when  fortune  carried  him  still  higher,  he  enjoyed  no  such 
universal  esteem  as  was  his  when,  at  the  close  of  the  famous 
Twenty-seventh  Congress,  he  declined  a reelection  and  proposed  to 
retire  from  public  life. 

The  session  of  1833-34  has  always  been  cited  as  the  one  in  which 
that  system  of  politics  known  as  Jacksonism,  was  fully  developed. 
During  his  first  term  General  Jackson,  and  those  who  shaped  the 
policy  of  the  Administration,  pursued  a comparatively  cautious 
course.  But  the  ordeal  of  the  election  of  1832  having  been  passed, 


INTRODUCTION.  Xvii 

the  mask  was  thrown  off.  The  reelection  of  General  Jackson  was 
construed  into  a popular  approval  of  all  his  acts. 

It  was  in  the  stormy  session  of  1833-34,  immediately  succeeding 
the  removal  of  the  deposits,  that  Mr.  Fillmore  took  his  seat.  In 
those  days  the  business  of  the  House  was  conducted  and  debates 
were  led  by  old  and  experienced  members;  new  ones,  unless  they 
enjoyed  an  exceptional  reputation,  rarely  taking  an  active  or  con- 
spicuous part.  Little  chance,  therefore,  was  afforded  Mr.  Fillmore, 
a member  of  the  opposition,  of  displaying  his  abilities.  By  the  time 
his  second  term  was  entered  upon,  Jacksonism  and  the  pet  bank 
system,  had  in  the  march  of  “progressive  Democracy”  given  place 
to  Van  Burenism  and  the  Sub-Treasury.  It  was  but  another  step 
toward  the  practical  repudiation  of  old  Republican  principles,  and 
an  advance  to  the  Loco-Focoism  of  the  later  ’40’s.  In  this  Congress, 
Mr.  Fillmore  was  assigned  to  a place  on  the  Elections  Committee. 
It  was  this  post  that  brought  him  into  prominence,  both  in  the  House 
and  before  the  country  at  large  in  connection  with  the  famous  New 
Jersey  contested  election  cases. 

On  this,  and  one  or  two  other  long-dead  issues,  the  following 
pages  do  not  undertake  to  record  all  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  utterances. 
In  the  New  Jersey  case,  for  example,  the  minority  report  to  the 
House  and  the  “Address  to  the  country”  cover  substantially  the  same 
ground,  and  the  latter  only  is  here  printed.1  On  other  topics,  too, 
Mr.  Fillmore’s  desultory  remarks  are  sometimes  omitted,  especially 
on  purely  routine  or  tactical  points.  But  whenever  he  spoke  on 
leading  issues,  or  based  his  remarks  on  broad  principles  of  right  or 
advantage  to  the  country,  an  abstract,  more  or  less  full,  is  given. 
His  formal  speeches  are  printed  as  complete  as  possible,  except  as 
to  the  introduction  of  quotations,  statistical  exhibits,  etc.  It  should 
be  borne  in  mind,  however,  that  the  only  existing  reports  of  many 
of  these  speeches  and  debates,  are  exceedingly  imperfect.  They 
have  been  drawn  from  the  official  record  of  Congress — in  Mr. 
Fillmore’s  day,  the  Globe — from  Gales  & Seaton’s  “Register  of 
Debates  in  Congress,”  and,  in  one  or  two  cases,  from  subsequent 
revised  publication  in  pamphlet  form.  These  are  noted  in  the 
bibliographical  list  appended. 

The  especial  design  of  the  editor  has  been  to  give  Mr.  Fillmore’s 
words  on  important  issues,  where  they  are  preserved;  and  to  make 
apparent  his  part  in  legislation,  and  his  motives  of  conduct. 

From  the  beginning  of  his  public  career  he  made  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States  his  sole  guide  in  all  matters  which  could 


1.  See  pp.  148,  151  et  seq. 


XV111 


INTRODUCTION. 


be  referred  to  it  or  regulated  by  it.  If  a thing  were  not  clearly  con- 
stitutional, he  could  oppose  it  with  a pertinacity  which  was  none 
the  less  resolute,  because  always  courteous  and  considerate  of  the 
viewpoint  of  others  and  the  rights  even  of  his  most  implacable 
opponents. 

One  of  the  measures,  relatively  of  minor  importance,  which 
received  Mr.  Fillmore’s  attention  was  a bill  “to  establish  the  Western 
[i.  e.  Indian]  Territory.”  Mr.  Fillmore  was  disposed  to  support  the 
measure,  but  did  not  regard  it  as  properly  an  act  of  legislation,  as 
it  only  made  proposals  to  the  Indians,  which  they  might  accept  or 
reject.  In  fact,  it  approached  nearer  to  an  act  of  the  treaty-making 
power,  although  in  a form  which  would  not,  as  other  treaties  did, 
require  the  assent  of  two-thirds  of  the  Senate  for  its  confirmation.1 
Prior  to  this  (June  5)  Mr.  Fillmore  had  taken  a slight  part  in  debate 
on  bills  in  relation  to  the  territories  of  Michigan,  Arkansas  and 
Florida;  he  had  opposed  a bill  of  sundry  citizens  of  Arkansas,  on 
the  ground  that  it  encouraged  squatters  to  violate  the  law  and 
invade  the  public  lands ; and  had  discussed  the  repeal  of  certain 
acts  of  the  legislative  council  of  Florida.  It  was  not  however  until 
the  disturbances  of  the  Upper  Canada  Rebellion  brought  his  own 
home  region  suddenly  into  national  notice,  that  his  advocacy  of 
measures  began  to  have  new  ardor  and  weight.  He  introduced  reso- 
lution after  resolution,  calling  on  the  President  for  information, 
calling  on  the  Committee  on  Military  Affairs  to  proceed  at  once 
with  the  fortification  of  the  Northern  frontier.  On  December  15, 
1837,  he  had  written  to  Brig.-Gen.  Charles  Gratiot,  chief  engineer  of 
the  Army,  enclosing  a communication  from  the  Buffalo  Common 
Council,  relative  to  the  exposed  condition  of  the  harbor  of  that 
city  in  consequence  of  damage  done  by  a recent  storm;  and  as  a 
result  of  his  representations,  a survey  and  estimates  for  repairs 
were  ordered.  A few  weeks  later,  we  find  him  presenting  to  the 
House  a memorial  which  the  citizens  of  Buffalo  had  adopted,  Feb- 
ruary 12,  1838,  under  the  stress  of  the  Caroline  excitement;  and  so 
effective  was  his  plea  for  better  protection  on  the  frontier,  that  by 
June  13th  the  War  Department  reported  its  determination  to  place 
an  armed  steamboat  on  Lake  Erie.  In  1842  he  personally  urged 
before  the  Navy  Board  that  an  iron  vessel  for  the  lakes  be  built  at 
Buffalo.  The  outcome  of  this  was  the  construction  of  the  man-of- 
war  Michigan,  not  at  Buffalo,  indeed,  but  at  Pittsburg,  followed  by 
an  arduous  transport  in  sections  to  Cleveland,  and  thence  by  steamer 


1.  Remarks  in  the  House,  June  25,  1834.  The  bill  was  lost. 


INTRODUCTION. 


XIX 


to  Erie,  where  she  was  rebuilt,  and  in  1843  launched  on  her  long 
term  of  service. 

The  New  Jersey  contested  election  cases  have  been  referred  to. 
With  the  exception  of  his  share  in  tariff  revision,  nothing  during 
Mr.  Fillmore’s  terms  in  Congress  received  more  attention  from  him, 
or  brought  him  more  prominently  before  the  country,  than  these 
famous  cases.  At  the  opening  of  the  Twenty-sixth  Congress,  in  which 
New  Jersey  was  entitled  to  six  members  of  the  House  of  Represen- 
tatives, it  was  found  that  five  of  the  six  had  certificates  of  election 
from  the  Governor  of  the  State,  but  that  the  validity  of  their  election 
was  questioned,  and  the  Clerk  of  the  House  declined  to  call  their 
names  as  members  until  he  knew  the  pleasure  of  the  House.  Had 
the  political  balance  of  that  body  been  less  nearly  even,  no  doubt  the 
Governor’s  certificates  would  have  been  satisfactory  proof  of  elec- 
tion. The  Whigs  claimed  that  these  certificates  should  be  regarded 
as  conclusive  proof  of  election  until  the  House  was  regularly 
organized.  The  Democrats  contended  that  the  House  should  decide 
the  question  before  proceeding  to  elect  a Speaker.  John  Quincy 
Adams  was  chosen  temporary  chairman  and  two  weeks  were  con- 
sumed in  discussion  as  to  whether  the  New  Jersey  members  were 
entitled  to  their  seats.  At  the  end  of  this  period,  a Speaker  having 
been  chosen,  the  discussion  of  the  New  Jersey  contested  seats  was 
resumed  and  occupied  the  greater  part  of  the  time  of  the  House  for 
some  weeks,  so  that  the  standing  committees  were  not  named  until 
near  the  close  of  December.  Mr.  Fillmore  was  made  a member  of 
the  Committee  of  Elections,  which  owing  to  the  contest,  at  once 
became  for  the  time  being  the  most  important  committee  of  the 
House.  With  his  colleagues  he  worked  over  this  case  “from  seven 
to  ten  hours  a day  in  committee.”  The  investigation  ran  on  until 
the  middle  of  March,  1840.  But  a majority  of  the  committee,  as  well 
as  of  the  House,  were  Democrats.  Mr.  Fillmore  in  the  House,  on 
February  19th,  spoke  at  length  on  the  history  of  the  case  and  of  its 
consideration  by  the  committee.  On  reading  (or  attempting  to 
read),  on  a motion  to  print,  a resolution  adopted  in  committee, 
but  not  reported  to  the  House,  he  was  called  to  order,  and  pre- 
vented from  completing  his  remarks.  The  decision  of  the  Chair 
being  appealed  from,  Mr.  Fillmore  persisted  in  his  right  to  the  floor, 
but  on  vote  of  the  House,  the  Chair  was  sustained,  ruling  that  Mr. 
Fillmore  could  not  read  the  resolution.  Mr.  Fillmore  still  claimed 
the  floor,  and  after  a hot  contention  gained  leave  to  explain  the 
situation  of  the  question  on  which  he  was  called  to  order.  He 
claimed  that  although  he  might  not  read  the  resolution,  he  was 


XX 


INTRODUCTION. 


entitled  to  continue  his  remarks.  The  Chair  ruled  that  he  might  not, 
except  by  permission  of  the  House.  Mr.  Fillmore  retorted  that  he 
would  never  submit  his  right  to  be  heard  on  that  floor  and  the 
right  of  his  constituents,  to  the  vote  of  a majority.  “He  spoke  by 
right  and  not  by  permission.”  The  House,  however,  saw  it  other- 
wise. Being  thus  prevented  from  reading  a minority  report,  and 
silenced  while  attempting  to  make  a speech,  Mr.  Fillmore’s  indigna- 
tion at  what  he  felt  to  be  unjust  and  unlawful  treatment  led  him 
to  address  a long  letter  to  his  constituents,  in  which  he  argued  all 
the  questions  involved  in  the  New  Jersey  case.  That  letter,  with 
an  abstract  of  his  remarks  during  the  debate  covering  several  days, 
will  be  found  in  their  place  in  the  following  pages.  The  tenacity 
and  ability  with  which  he  fought  for  his  party  and  position  in  this 
case  did  much  towards  winning  him  the  leadership  of  the  succeed- 
ing Congress. 

Mr.  Fillmore’s  speech  of  January  15,  1842,  against  the  arbitrary, 
unparliamentary  and  oppressive  measures  resorted  to  by  those  in 
favor  of  repealing  the  Bankrupt  Law,  brought  him  more  prominently 
than  ever  before  to  the  attention  of  the  country.  The  following 
passage  from  the  report  of  the  speech  by  the  Washington  corre- 
spondent of  the  New  York  American , well  states  the  estimate  which 
many  friendly  minds  formed  of  him  at  that  period: 

One  of  the  finest  passages  which  I ever  witnessed  in  a legislative 
hall,  was  when  Fillmore,  on  Cushing’s  appeal  from  the  Speaker’s 
decision,  that  a bare  majority  might  peremptorily  order  an  immedi- 
ate report  of  the  repeal,  rose  in  the  midst  of  an  uproar  which  would 
have  borne  down  many  a bold  man,  and  in  a tone  that  hushed  the 
tempest  to  a breath,  and  rang  through  the  vast  hall  with  a thrill 
that  seemed  to  reach  every  heart,  appealed  to  even  the  precedent 
of  the  odious  New  Jersey  case,  and  shamed  the  Whigs  of  the  major- 
ity by  showing  them  that  in  that  case,  the  only  one  on  record  of  a 
peremptory  order  “to  report  forthwith,”  the  decencies  of  debate  and 
the  rights  of  a minority  were  better  respected  than  now. 

He  rose  above  himself  and  gave  evidence  of  powers  of  a higher 
order  than  I believed  him  to  possess.  Dignified,  cool,  self-possessed, 
conciliating,  clear,  concise  and  indefatigable,  he  always  was;  but 
now  he  shone  out  in  a majestic,  high-toned  eloquence,  that  aston- 
ished and  even  convinced.  The  vote  was  101  for  the  decision,  98 
against  it.  On  all  other  questions  the  votes  stood  about  115  to  88. 
“Fillmore,”  as  some  one  remarked  at  the  moment  in  my  hearing, 
“is  a great  man ; but  it  takes  a strong  pressure  to  make  him  show 
out  his  highest  powers.” 

On  February  13,  1843,  President  Tyler  sent  a special  message  to 
Congress,  calling  upon  that  body  to  provide  means  against  an 
alleged  probable  deficiency  of  revenue  from  the  current  year.  It 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXI 


was  understood  at  the  time  that  the  intent  of  the  message  was  to 
pave  the  way  for  a special  session  of  Congress.  The  message  was 
referred  to  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  and  Mr.  Fillmore, 
chairman  of  that  committee,  promptly  made  a report,  showing  con- 
clusively that,  unless  there  was  a wide  departure  from  the  practice 
of  preceding  Administrations,  there  would  be  a large  surplus  in 
the  Treasury  on  the  first  day  of  January,  1844.  The  balance  of 
receipts  over  expenditures  on  that  day,  as  estimated  by  Mr.  Fillmore, 
would  exceed  five  millions.  The  Whigs  did  not  fail  to  use  the  inci- 
dent to  ridicule  the  President  for  having  formally  proclaimed  the 
Government  to  be  on  the  verge  of  bankruptcy. 

A curious  issue  of  this  campaign  was  the  persistent — and  in  the 
outcome,  successful — attack  made  on  Mr.  Fillmore  by  the  Loco 
Focos.  They  resorted  to  a method  of  attack  which  has  been  used 
more  than  once  since — that  of  attempting  to  represent  a candidate 
as  the  tool  or  ally  of  the  rich,  and  as  conspiring  with  them  against 
the  interests  of  the  poor.  In  1844,  this  stock  recourse  of  demogog- 
ism  assumed  the  form  of  gross  misrepresentation.  Mr.  Fillmore  was 
charged  with  being  in  favor  of  protecting  the  products  of  wealthy 
manufacturers,  and  at  the  same  time  of  taxing  “the  poor  man’s  tea 
and  coffee.”  It  was  in  vain  that  Mr.  Fillmore’s  friends,  and  the 
press  of  his  party,  called  attention  to  his  record  on  the  tariff.  That 
record  may  be  in  the  main  gathered  from  Mr.  Fillmore’s  words  in 
the  following  pages,  but  some  note  here  of  the  situation  may  be 
helpful. 

In  the  summer  of  1842  it  became  apparent  that  the  National 
treasury  was  virtually  bankrupt.  It  owed  more  than  it  had  resources 
for  paying,  and  existing  conditions  made  the  situation  daily  worse. 
It  was  Mr.  Fillmore,  for  the  House  Ways  and  Means  committee, 
who  reported  a tariff  bill  to  meet  the  emergency.  In  this  bill,  a 
duty  on  tea  and  coffee  was  proposed.  The  bill,  in  support  of  which 
Mr.  Fillmore  made  his  famous  speech  of  June  9,  1842  (pp.  196-235), 
was  vetoed  by  the  President.  Subsequently  a tariff  bill  was  passed, 
admitting  tea  and  coffee  free,  although  the  duty  on  those  articles 
was  by  no  means  a party  issue,  many  Loco  Focos  favoring  their 
taxation.  At  the  next  session  of  Congress  a message  was  received 
from  the  President,  urging  the  necessity  of  further  provisions  for 
revenue;  and  in  an  accompanying  letter  from  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  tea  and  coffee  were  among  the  articles  suggested  for 
taxation.  In  the  report  made  by  Mr.  Fillmore  on  this  message  and 
the  Secretary’s  letter,  he  said: 


XXII 


INTRODUCTION. 


The  committee  never  have  nor  will  they  now  shrink  from  any 
responsibility  incident  to  their  situation.  As  an  evidence  of  this, 
it  is  proper  to  remark  that  they  have  twice  recommended  a duty  on 
these  articles,  and  twice  has  the  House  of  Representatives  fearlessly 
sustained  them  in  this  recommendation,  and  passed  a bill  imposing 
the  duty.  And  this  self-sacrificing  devotion,  on  the  part  of  the 
House,  to  what  they  deemed  the  wants  of  the  Treasury  and  the 
good  of  the  country,  under  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  discourage- 
ment and  embarrassment,  is  a strong  proof  that  the  same  body  might 
be  confidently  relied  upon  again  to  do  the  same  act  whenever  they 
are  convinced  that  the  good  of  their  country  requires  it.  But  both 
of  these  patriotic  efforts  proved  abortive — the  first  by  the  refusal 
of  the  Senate  to  concur,  and  the  latter  by  the  veto  of  the  President. 
At  that  time  the  House  doubtless  entertained  the  same  sentiment 
that  the  President  has  expressed  in  his  recent  message,  that  the 
“proper  objects  of  taxation  are  peculiarly  within  the  discretion  of 
the  Legislature.”  They  believed  that  the  good  of  the  country,  that 
the  welfare  of  a suffering  community,  would  be  best  promoted  by 
putting  a duty  on  tea  and  coffee,  and  distributing  the  proceeds  of 
the  public  lands  to  the  several  States.  But  the  President,  differing 
in  opinion  with  Congress,  refused  to  submit  this  matter  to  legisla- 
tive discretion,  and  by  his  veto  prevented  the  tariff  bill  from  passing, 
until  Congress,  to  save  the  honor  and  credit  of  the  nation,  was 
compelled  to  yield  up  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands  to  the  Treas- 
ury of  the  United  States  by  passing  a law  which  suspended  the  dis- 
tribution. But  they  did  not  then  consider  that  it  was  necessary  for 
an  economical  administration  of  the  general  Government  that  the 
proceeds  of  the  public  lands  should  go  into  the  public  Treasury, 
and,  in  addition  thereto,  that  a duty  should  be  imposed  on  tea  and 
coffee.  And  they  still  hope  that  a judicious  retrenchment,  in  which 
Congress  has  been  actively  engaged,  may  save  the  people,  who  are 
suffering  almost  beyond  endurance,  from  any  increased  burdens  of 
taxation.  The  committee  will,  however,  proceed  to  examine  the 
state  of  the  Treasury,  and  if  the  result  shall  show  that  this  addi- 
tional tax  will  be  necessary  to  maintain  the  credit  of  the  country, 
they  will  not  hesitate  to  recommend  its  adoption  by  the  House,  in 
the  full  confidence  that  the  House,  when  equally  convinced,  will,  as 
it  has  done  heretofore,  fearlessly  and  patriotically  meet  the  emer- 
gency and  take  the  responsibility. 

It  was  found  that  no  further  tax  was  necessary;  the  tariff  as 
fixed  at  that  time  proved  adequate,  and  under  its  provisions,  once 
they  were  fairly  in  force,  trade  and  manufacturing  flourished. 


To  his  duties  as  State  Comptroller,  regarding  which  he  had  in 
correspondence  expressed  doubts  as  to  his  fitness,  Mr.  Fillmore 
brought  habits  and  qualifications  which  would  appear  to  have  been 
an  ideal  equipment  for  his  task.  His  experience  in  Congress  had 
strengthened  his  natural  aptitude  for  financial  affairs;  caution,  his 


INTRODUCTION. 


XX111 


most  pronounced  trait,  served  him  admirably  in  these  duties ; and 
his  characteristic  industry,  love  of  system,  and  honest  devotion  to 
the  good  of  the  Commonwealth,  still  further  contributed  to  make 
his  administration  of  the  office  conspicuous  for  economy  and  effici- 
ency. That  portion  of  his  only  annual  report  which  is  printed  in 
the  following  pages,  will  be  found  a valuable  historical  treatise  on 
the  systems  of  banking  in  vogue  in  New  York  State  for  well  nigh 
half  a century,  with  practical  suggestions  for  better  methods. 

One  conspicuous  service  performed  by  Mr.  Fillmore  as  Comp- 
troller was  in  the  handling  of  the  canal  funds.  In  1848,  the  joint 
canal  committees  of  the  Assembly  and  Senate  recommended  that 
$1,258,653  be  appropriated  to  the  prosecution  of  work  that  year  on 
the  Erie,  Genesee  and  Black  River  canals.  It  was  shown  that  of 
this  amount,  $489,000  was  obtained  by  a decision  of  Mr.  Fillmore 
that  an  erroneous  withdrawal  of  the  amount  had  been  made  by  a 
former  administration,  from  the  sum  set  apart  for  public  works. 
“It  is  the  difference,”  said  an  Albany  correspondent  of  the  New  York 
Courier  and  Enquirer,  “in  construing  the  Constitution.  The  enlight- 
ened and  liberal  policy  pursued  by  Mr.  Fillmore  in  this  case  will 
be  appreciated  by  the  people  of  all  sections  of  our  State,  for  they 
will  see  in  the  rapid  progress  of  the  system  of  internal  improvement, 
the  evidences  of  the  clear  and  comprehensive  statesmanship  of  that 
eminent  man.  The  people  of  the  country  benefited  by  the  Genesee 
Valley  canal,  who  had  almost  given  up  every  hope  of  seeing  their 
great  avenue  completed,  will  be  delighted  at  the  unexpectedly  large 
appropriation  given  to  it — and  so  too  with  the  Black  River  canal, 
which  will  soon  by  its  usefulness  refute  the  charges  which  it  was 
the  fashion,  among  those  who  knew  no  better,  to  make  against  it. 
The  State  has  been  exceedingly  fortunate  in  calling  to  its  public 
service,  a statesman  who  neglects  nothing — sees  thoroughly  to  every- 
thing, and  deems  no  interest  of  the  State  unworthy  of  his  close  and 
careful  attention.” 


In  the  Whig  National  convention  at  Philadelphia,  June  9>  I848, 
Gen.  Zachary  Taylor  of  Louisiana  was  nominated  for  President  on 
the  fourth  ballot.  The  final  vote  stood:  Taylor,  171 ; Clay,  32; 

Scott,  63;  Webster,  14.  Mr.  Fillmore’s  name  was  presented  by  the 
Hon.  John  A.  Collier,  a delegate-at-large  from  New  York;  he  was 
nominated  for  Vice-President  on  the  second  ballot.  On  the  first 
ballot  he  received  115  votes,  against  109  for  Abbott  Lawrence,  and 
scattering  votes  for  half  a dozen  others.  On  the  second  ballot  Mr. 
Lawrence’s  support  fell  to  87  and  Mr.  Fillmore  received  173  of  the 


XXIV 


INTRODUCTION. 


266  votes  cast.  His  letter  of  acceptance,  written  at  Albany,  June 
17,  1848,  addressed  to  the  Hon.  J.  M.  Morehead,  ex-Governor  of 
North  Carolina,  who  had  been  the  president  of  the  convention,  will 
be  found  in  due  order  in  the  following  pages. 


As  Vice-President,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  an  ideal  presiding  officer. 
Always  urbane,  dignified,  judicial  in  bearing  as  in  habit  of  mind, 
he  ruled  with  impartiality  and  imbued  his  associates  with  a new 
sense  of  the  dignity  of  their  office  and  the  service  they  were  looked 
upon  to  perform.  His  most  notable  address,  during  this  period,  was 
made  unexpectedly  one  morning  in  the  Senate  when  he  rose  at  his 
desk,  and  before  the  orders  for  the  day  were  entered  upon,  delivered 
a dissertation  to  the  surprised  Senators  on  the  necessity  of  a courte- 
ous observance  of  order  in  their  deliberations,  and  announcing  his 
purpose  to  depart  when  necessary  from  a custom  that  had  been  in 
vogue  since  the  days  of  John  C.  Calhoun,  and  call  a Senator  to  order 
for  words  spoken  in  debate,  whenever  he  deemed  the  occasion  for  it 
had  arisen.  It  was  a wholesome  assertion  of  authority,  and  con- 
tributed to  a better  dispatch  of  business  in  the  body  over  which  he 
presided. 


Mr.  Fillmore  came  to  the  Presidency  at  a period  of  extraordin- 
ary perplexity  and  difficulty.  Congress  had  been  in  session  for  an 
exceptionally  long  period,  involved  in  abortive  efforts  to  adjust  the 
sectional  questions  which  had  been  thrown  upon  the  country  by  the 
acquisition  of  extensive  territories  from  Mexico.  There  was  per- 
petual and  increasing  conflict  between  the  extremists  of  North  and 
South.  When  he  took  the  helm,  Mr.  Fillmore  saw  the  breakers 
ahead.  Their  ominous  roar  sounded  “Disunion”  in  his  ears.  He  was 
an  Abolitionist,  yet  not  such  an  Abolitionist  as  were  many  in  the 
North.  It  took  courage,  in  such  a crisis,  to  defy  alike  the  ravings 
of  Southern  Disunionists  and  the  curses  of  extreme  Abolitionists  at 
the  North.  Mr.  Fillmore  determined  on  a middle  course,  and  held 
to  it.  Under  his  auspices,  the  Compromise  measures  then  pending 
in  Congress  became  laws.  For  the  time  being  the  crisis  was  past. 
When  forcible  opposition  to  the  execution  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  law 
was  threatened  in  the  North,  he  firmly  announced  his  purpose  to 
enforce  the  law — relying,  as  he  never  failed  to  do,  on  the  sanction 
and  support  of  the  Constitution.  When  South  Carolina  proclaimed 
it  to  be  her  purpose  to  secede,  he  was  equally  ready  to  declare  his 
firm  purpose  of  upholding  the  supremacy  of  Federal  authority. 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXV 


Into  the  great  issues  of  his  term  as  President,  on  his  attitude 
towards  which  Mr.  Fillmore’s  reputation  as  a statesman  chiefly 
rests,  it  is  not  the  province  of  these  notes  to  enter.  Attention  should, 
however,  be  called  to  the  suppressed  portion  of  his  Message  of 
December  6,  1852,  relating  to  slavery.  It  is,  apparently,  little  known 
even  to  those  who  have  made  an  especial  study  of  the  political  his- 
tory of  our  country  at  that  period.  It  was  omitted  from  the  Mes- 
sage, as  finally  sent  to  Congress,  by  the  counsel  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s 
nearest  advisers.  It  shows  that  he  had  considered  the  question  of 
slavery,  and  the  future  of  the  institution  in  America,  deeply  and 
without  prejudice.  He  sought  a peaceful  solution — a way  out  of  the 
difficulty  that  could  be  defended  by  the  Constitution — a way  with- 
out disunion.  It  was  not  in  his  vision  that  the  solution  would  come 
in  a way  of  upheaval  and  bloodshed;  would  come  by  the  hand  of 
one  who  would  rise  above  the  Constitution  in  remembering  humanity, 
one  who  was  great  enough  to  strike  the  shackles  from  the  slave, 
keeping  in  view  the  eternal  principles  of  right,  rather  than  the 
hampering  obstacles  of  law.  Millard  Fillmore  was  a conscientious 
man;  but  he  was  no  Lincoln. 

With  the  exception  of  appending  his  signature  to  the  Fugitive 
Slave  law,  probably  no  act  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  Administration  was 
more  harshly  criticised  than  his  appointment  of  Brigham  Young 
as  Governor  of  Utah.  It  is  still  a subject  of  much  misconception. 
Utah  was  erected  into  a territory  by  an  Act  of  Congress,  passed  in 
September,  1850.  Mr.  Fillmore  was  in  office  for  two  and  a half 
years  after  the  passage  of  that  act.  During  the  whole  of  this  time, 
the  Mormons  were,  however,  quiet  and  orderly.  In  1850,  they  were 
known  as  a people  who  professed  a peculiar,  and  to  most  citizens 
of  the  country,  an  absurd  religion;  but  they  were  not  known  at 
the  time  as  a community  of  polygamists.  They  had  been  persecuted 
in  Missouri  and  Illinois,  had  been  driven  out  of  their  famous  estab- 
lishment at  Nauvoo,  and  had  sought  a refuge  beyond  the  Rocky 
Mountains.  They  were,  naturally,  bitter  towards  the  Gentiles  who 
had  persecuted  them,  and  towards  the  Government.  Having  to  deal 
with  the  problem,  Mr.  Fillmore  followed  his  usual  course  of  seeking 
conciliation  if  possible.  In  his  judgment  conciliation  was  better 
than  attempted  coercion.  He  thought  that  by  the  appointment  of 
some  of  their  prominent  men  to  an  important  office  in  the  new  ter- 
ritory, the  Mormons  might  be  won  back  to  loyal  allegiance  to  the 
Government,  while  still  maintaining  the  form  of  worship  which 
they  had  chosen.  He  selected  the  Governor  and  one  of  the  three 
territorial  judges  from  the  Mormon  sect.  The  secretary  of  the  ter- 


XXVI 


INTRODUCTION. 


ritory,  two  judges  and  other  officers  were  sent  to  Utah  from  the 
States  and  were  not  Mormons.  Before  appointing  Brigham  Young 
Governor,  Mr.  Fillmore  with  his  invariable  prudence,  took  pains 
to  learn  from  authentic  and  respectable  sources  whether  the  char- 
acter of  the  candidate  would  justify  the  appointment.  Being  assured 
in  the  matter,  Brigham  Young  was  duly  appointed.  That  the  Mor- 
mon organization  was  to  bear  the  stamp  of  polygamy,  was  not 
known  until  near  the  close  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  Administration.  The 
reader  who  may  be  curious  in  the  matter  is  referred  to  an  article 
published  by  the  Edinburgh  Review  for  April,  1854,  in  which  is 
given  an  account  of  Brigham  Young’s  revelation  in  July,  1843,  by 
which  he  received  Divine  authority  for  himself  and  followers  to 
have  an  unlimited  number  of  wives.  This,  it  will  be  noted,  was 
the  first  promulgation  of  this  feature  of  Mormonism — long  after 
Mr.  Fillmore  had  appointed  Young  as  Governor;  nor  does  it  appear 
that  there  arose  during  Mr.  Fillmore’s  term  as  President  any  occa- 
sion for  Young’s  removal. 


The  Compromise  measures  of  1850,  and  slavery  and  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Act,  were  the  greatest  questions  which  his  Administration 
had  to  confront.  Of  the  other  matters  of  which  he  wrote,  especially 
to  Webster,  the  mission  of  Kossuth  and  the  Hiilsemann  correspon- 
dence, the  Lopez  filibustering  expedition  to  Cuba,  the  Amistad  affair, 
the  Lobos  Islands  contention,  matters  relating  to  the  Mormons,  the 
Perry  expedition  to  Japan,  our  relations  with  Peru,  with  Mexico, 
with  Nicaragua — on  these  and  other  subjects,  to  which  Mr.  Fillmore’s 
letters  relate,  there  already  exists  historical  record,  for  the  most  part 
of  convenient  access  to  the  student;  but  there  has  not  existed  here- 
tofore, any  gathered  material  showing  Mr.  Fillmore’s  views  on  these 
matters,  or  recording  his  uniform  effort  and  desire  for  just  and 
honorable  dealings  with  all,  whether  at  home  or  abroad. 

Among  the  achievements  to  be  credited  to  his  Administration, 
besides  the  Perry  expedition  which  opened  Japan  to  the  world,  were 
the  expedition  into  Africa  under  Lieutenant  Lynch,  the  Ringgold 
expedition  to  China,  the  Herndon  & Gibbon  expedition  up  the 
Amazon;  the  inauguration  of  cheaper  postage,  the  establishment  of 
an  agricultural  bureau,  the  extension  of  the  Capitol;  and  in  general, 
prosperous  conditions  at  home,  and  harmonious  relations  with  the 
rest  of  the  world.  A mere  allusion  to  these  features  of  his  Admin- 
istration is  adequate  for  the  present  purpose. 

Nor  is  it  necessary  here  to  go  into  the  details  of  his  break  with 
Thurlow  Weed,  which  resulted  in  an  estrangement  lasting  for  years. 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXV11 


finally  to  end,  as  Mr.  Weed  has  recorded  in  his  own  memoirs, 
through  the  overtures  of  Mr.  Fillmore,  so  that  in  their  last  years 
amicable  relations  were  restored.  Something  of  it — not  much — is  to 
be  traced  in  Mr.  Fillmore’s  letters  to  Mr.  Weed;  the  reader  will 
not  fail  to  note  the  change  of  tone— and  then  their  total  cessation. 
Mr.  Weed’s  version  has  been  given  to  the  world  in  his  “Memoirs,” 
and  has  no  doubt  influenced  the  views  of  others  who  have  written 
on  the  subject.  Mr.  Weed  claimed  to  be  responsible  for  Mr. 
Fillmore’s  nomination  for  Comptroller.  Mr.  Fillmore’s  friends  main- 
tained that  Weed’s  was  a hollow  friendship — that  believing  Mr. 
Fillmore  would  not  accept  the  nomination,  he  wished  to  force  it 
on  him,  and  then,  in  the  event  of  his  declination,  charge  him  with 
refusing  to  serve  the  Whig  party,  and  claim  that  all  obligations  to 
him  were  absolved.1  On  the  origin  of  the  estrangement,  little  can 
be  gathered  from  Mr.  Fillmore’s  own  writings ; but  its  effect  can 
be  traced  in  the  course  of  both  National  and  New  York  State  poli- 
tics. When  on  General  Taylor’s  death,  Mr.  Fillmore  succeeded  to 
the  Presidency  and  reconstructed  his  Cabinet,  he  was  freely  charged 
with  playing  false  to  the  party  that  had  elected  him.  He  had  acted 
contrary  to  the  advice  of  Mr.  Seward,2  and  entered  upon  a policy 
of  compromise  and  conciliation.  The  President’s  independent  course 
in  regard  to  New  York  State  patronage,  especially  the  Canal  Board 
appointments,  still  further  embittered  Mr.  Seward.  Throughout  his 
administration  as  President  Mr.  Fillmore  had  nowhere  greater  politi- 
cal hostility  to  contend  with  than  in  his  own  State. 


It  had  been  Mr.  Fillmore’s  purpose,  at  the  close  of  his  term  as 
President,  to  make  a long  tour  through  the  South,  accompanied  by 
several  members  of  his  Cabinet.  That  he  hoped  by  so  doing  to 
check  the  tendency  to  disunion,  is  certain.  But  these  plans  were 
changed  by  the  death  of  Mrs.  Fillmore,  in  the  same  month  in  which 
his  term  ended,  and  a year  passed  before  Mr.  Fillmore  had  the  heart 
to  travel.  A part  of  the  tour  then  undertaken  was  made  in  com- 
pany with  Judge  Hall,  but  for  the  greater  part  of  it,  the  Hon.  John 
P.  Kennedy  of  Baltimore  was  his  traveling  companion.  Mr.  Fillmore 
and  Judge  Hall  set  out  in  March,  1854.  Their  first  stop  appears  to 
have  been  at  Columbus,  Ohio,  where  they  visited  the  Senate  and 
House  of  Representatives.  The  Ohio  State  Journal  said  of  this  visit 

1.  On  the  Weed-Fillmore  affair,  see  Dr.  Foote’s  full  and  explicit  state- 
ment, Buffalo  Commercial  Advertiser,  August  25,  1853. 

2.  See  Seward’s  Works,  Vol.  IV.,  p.  19. 


XXV111 


INTRODUCTION. 


that  “they  attracted  much  attention,  both  from  their  high  position 
among  the  leading  men  of  the  nation  and  the  fact  that  they  ranked 
among  the  best-looking  men  of  the  country.”  In  Cincinnati,  a few 
days  later,  a public  reception  was  arranged  for  them.  Mr.  Fillmore’s 
tour  through  Kentucky  was  marked  by  general  ovations  of  friend- 
ship and  admiration  at  every  place  at  which  he  stopped.  He  visited 
Louisville,  Lexington,  Frankfort,  Ashland,  the  home  of  Henry  Clay, 
the  latter  being,  perhaps,  the  chief  objective  point  in  Mr.  Fillmore’s 
journey. 

Mr.  Fillmore  was  called  upon  to  speak  at  every  point  he  visited. 
While  on  most  occasions  his  remarks  were  merely  those  of  com- 
pliment and  thanks  for  his  reception,  yet  on  two  or  three  occasions 
he  took  the  opportunity  to  dwell  on  political  issues,  both  past  and 
present;  some  of  these  speeches,  either  through  inadequate  report- 
ing or  through  malice,  utterly  misrepresent  his  views;  and  notwith- 
standing his  subsequent  corrections  and  denials,  had  wide  currency 
in  distorted  form  among  his  political  opponents  at  the  North.  No 
other  record  of  most  of  these  speeches  is  known  to  the  present  editor 
than  the  contemporary  newspaper  reports.  Sometimes  these  are 
mere  abstracts,  a form  of  reporting  which  is  seldom  just  to  the 
speaker;  and  at  other  times  they  undertake  to  give  verbatim  Mr. 
Fillmore’s  words.  As  printed  in  their  place  among  his  speeches  in 
this  collection,  they  are  drawn  from  these  various  Southern  news- 
papers, and  the  reader  should  bear  in  mind  the  conditions  under 
which  they  were  written. 

Mr.  Fillmore’s  tour  embraced  Vicksburgh,  New  Orleans  and 
Mobile.  He  contemplated  a visit  to  Cuba,  but  abandoned  it  and 
passed  on  to  Savannah,  and  thence  to  Charleston,  S.  C.,  early  in 
April,  his  visit  being  coincident  with  the  session  of  the  Southern 
Commercial  convention.  He  reached  Montgomery,  Alabama,  April 
15th  and  made  his  way  north  by  way  of  Augusta,  Atlanta,  Nashville, 
reaching  New  York  May  18th,  and  his  Buffalo  home  the  evening 
of  May  20th. 

Nine  days  later,  accompanied  by  his  son  and  numerous  other 
citizens  of  Buffalo,  he  set  out  for  Chicago,  from  which  point  the 
tourists  made  an  extended  jaunt  over  the  new  line  of  the  Chicago 
& Rock  Island  railway.  Among  other  points  visited  was  St.  Louis, 
where  an  enthusiastic  reception  was  arranged  for  the  ex-President 
on  June  12th.  He  went  up  the  Mississippi  to  St.  Paul,  an  incident 
of  the  trip  being  a meeting  on  board  the  steamer  “Golden  Era,”  at 
which  Mr.  Fillmore  presided  and  resolutions  were  adopted  express- 
ing the  appreciation  of  the  excursionists  for  the  enterprise  and  cour- 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXIX 


tesy  of  the  company,  whose  guests  they  were.  Among  Mr.  Fillmore’s 
companions  on  this  jaunt  were  the  Hon.  George  Bancroft  and 
Postmaster-General  Hall. 

The  European  tour  of  1855-56  is  but  scantily  recorded,  and  of 
the  second  visit  to  Europe  in  18 66  there  is  even  less  to  report.  Of 
the  former,  an  exceedingly  interesting  letter  to  his  old  friend,  the 
Hon.  Solomon  G.  Haven,  printed  in  the  present  collection,  preserves 
a pleasant  glimpse.  To  his  long-time  friends  and  traveling  com- 
panions for  a portion  of  the  tour,  Messrs.  Foote  and  Jewett,  it  is 
probable  that  graphic  letters  were  sent,  but  none  of  these  have  been 
found.1  The  visit  of  1855-56  was  not  without  its  honors,  though  Mr. 
Fillmore  traveled  as  a private  citizen,  and  on  many  occasions 
declined  receptions  and  other  marks  of  distinction.  He  has  recorded 
his  interview  with  Baron  von  Humboldt.  Of  his  presentation  at  the 
Court  of  St.  James  nothing  is  found  in  his  letters  or  speeches, 
though  this  honor  was  his,  and  the  tradition  lives  that  her  Majesty, 
Victoria,  pronounced  him  the  handsomest  man  she  had  ever  seen. 
He  attended  the  International  Exposition  in  Paris ; and  it  was  dur- 
ing his  stay  in  that  city  that  Horace  Greeley  was  shut  up  in  a French 
prison  for  debt.  Mr.  Greeley  wrote  a characteristic  account  of  this 
episode,  but  failed  to  mention,  what  is  said  to  be  the  fact,  that  it 
was  Mr.  Fillmore  who  came  to  his  relief.  Mr.  Fillmore  visited  him 
in  prison,  and  is  said  to  have  supplied  the  money  that  gained  him 
release.2  During  his  stay  in  Paris,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  presented  to 
the  Emperor  Louis  Napoleon,  and  subsequently,  in  Rome,  was 
granted  an  audience  by  Pope  Pius  IX. 

1.  Acknowledgment  is  due  to  Mr.  William  P.  Northrup  of  Buffalo,  who, 
at  the  request  of  the  editor,  made  search  among  the  papers  of  his  uncle,  the 
late  Elam  R.  Jewett;  but  contrary  to  expectation,  no  letters  from  Mr.  Fillmore 
were  found. 

2.  In  reply  to  an  inquiry  from  the  editor  of  this  volume,  regarding  this 

incident,  the  Hon.  Andrew  D.  White  writes:  “I  was  in  Paris  at  the  time,  saw 

Mr.  Greeley  and  remember  the  circumstances  well;  but  I cannot  state  whether 
Mr.  Fillmore  supplied  the  funds  for  Mr.  Greeley’s  release,  or  not.  All  that 
I heard  was,  as  regards  Mr.  Fillmore,  that  he  called  on  Mr.  Greeley  when  the 
latter  was  in  Clichy  prison.”  President  White  adds:  “My  remembrances  of 

Mr.  Fillmore  are  remarkably  vivid  in  view  of  the  fact  that  I saw  him  but 
once  or  twice.  This  vividness  is  probably  due  to  the  great  respect  in  which 
he  was  held  in  my  father’s  family  during  his  connection  with  the  State,  but 
possibly  even  more  by  the  impression  his  personal  appearance  made  on  me. 
He  was  certainly  one  of  the  finest  looking  men  I ever  saw,  and  when  after- 
wards I saw  Pope  Pius  IX  at  Rome,  saying  Mass  at  the  High  Altar  of  St. 
Peter’s  and  giving  the  blessing  to  the  crowd  in  the  front  of  that  church,  I 
was  struck  by  what  appeared  to  me,  a striking  resemblance  in  the  appearance 
and  bearing  of  the  two  men,  especially  in  the  remarkably  kindly  character  of 
their  faces.” 


XXX 


INTRODUCTION. 


Soon  after  his  return  to  America,  an  Englishwoman’s  report  of 
a conversation  with  Mr.  Fillmore  was  widely  published.  The  fol- 
lowing extract  may  be  preserved  here,  by  way  of  illustrating  certain 
of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  views.1 

We  were  one  day  talking  of  the  almost  impossibility  (I  mean 
as  a general  rule)  of  the  negro  becoming  an  intellectual  being;  and 
as  their  intellectual  faculties  are  unused,  so  their  senses  are  quick- 
ened; their  sight  how  keen,  finding  the  trail  where  European  eyes 
discerned  no  trace  of  feet.  From  this  we  passed  to  society  at  large. 
I said : “In  England  the  intellectual  classes  most  certainly  belong 

to  neither  the  highest  nor  the  lowest.” 

“Precisely,”  said  Mr.  Fillmore,  “they  are  of  those  who  have 
been  most  obliged  to  cultivate  their  faculties;  it  is  with  the  mind 
as  with  the  body,  if  any  muscles  are  unused,  they  contract  and  grow 
smaller;  and  every  power  of  mind  increases  in  like  measure  with 
its  use.  And  as  with  the  mind  so  with  the  spirit,  also ; the  ten 
talents  gain  other  ten,  while  the  hidden  treasure  lies  useless.” 

Speaking  of  agriculture,  he  said,  he  had  been  greatly  struck  in 
England  by  the  way  in  which  the  land  was  urged  to  the  utmost — 
every  bit  of  ground  being  cultivated  to  the  greatest  extent.  “Our 
implements,”  he  added,  “are  perhaps  the  best,  but  it  is  necessity 
with  us,  as  labor  is  scarce,  and  we  have  to  provide  otherwise.”  He 
then  contrasted  the  activity  and  life  of  England  with  the  decay  and 
langour  of  Italy.  Of  the  religion,  he  said:  “There  is  much  to 

captivate  many  minds — the  music,  the  painting,  the  devotion,  the 
equality,  high  and  low  kneeling  side  by  side,  before  their  common 
Father.” 

“Yes,  that  is  very  striking,”  said  I. 

He  looked  up  earnestly  and  added — in,  I believe,  these  words : 
“The  more  we  forget  station  in  religion,  the  nearer  we  are  to 
Christianity.” 

The  ex-President  admired  our  writers  in  the  most  hearty  way; 
he  remarked  that  Macaulay’s  description  of  the  trial  of  Warren 
Hastings  was  a “perfect  daguerreotype  of  the  scene.”  Carlyle  and 
the  German  school  did  not  come  in  for  much  praise;  but  he  liked 
Gray’s  “Elegy”  so  entirely,  that  he  had  been  to  Stoke  Pogis  to  see 
his  grave. 


For  many  years,  before  he  was  President  as  well  as  after,  Mr. 
Fillmore  was  the  citizen  of  Buffalo  most  likely  to  be  called  upon 
to  receive  and  welcome  distinguished  visitors.  It  was  in  this  capac- 
ity, as  the  following  pages  in  some  cases  attest,  that  he  welcomed 
ex-President  John  Quincy  Adams  in  1843,  President-elect  Abraham 
Lincoln  in  1861,  President  Andrew  Johnson  in  1866.  In  September, 
1851,  he  shared  in  entertaining  Sir  Samuel  Morton  Peto,  whose 
visit  to  Buffalo  preceded  a great  work  which  he  promoted,  the 


1.  Buffalo  Commercial  Advertiser,  April  9,  1857. 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXXI 


construction  of  the  International  Bridge  across  the  Niagara.  He 
shared  in  entertaining  the  Japanese  Ambassador,  Tomomi  Iwakura, 
and  his  suite  at  Niagara  Falls,  and  H.  R.  H.  Prince  Arthur  in 
Buffalo;  and  was  chosen  to  arrange  for  a reception  in  1861  to  the 
Prince  of  Wales,  who  was,  however,  unable  to  extend  his  American 
tour  to  Buffalo. 

By  reason  of  his  known  lack  of  sympathy  with  the  Northern 
cause,  Mr.  Fillmore's  reception  of  President  Lincoln  was  the  sub- 
ject of  much  gossip  and  speculation.  But  there  was  no  occasion, 
then  or  ever,  to  mistrust  his  courtesy  and  sincerity.  He  was  unable 
to  endorse  everything  in  Mr.  Lincoln’s  policy,  but  he  esteemed  Mr. 
Lincoln  as  a man,  and  no  one  outdid  him  in  the  cordiality  of  his 
welcome.  He  entertained  the  President  at  his  home,  and  paid  him 
every  attention,  consistent  with  the  simple,  unostentatious  hospital- 
ity that  both  guest  and  host  preferred.1 

In  shameful  contrast  with  this  was  the  indignity  offered  Mr. 
Fillmore  on  the  death  of  Lincoln,  his  house  being  smeared  with 
ink  because  it  displayed  no  signs  of  mourning.  No  matter  that  the 
simple  and  sufficient  explanation  was  promptly  made — the  omission 
being  due  to  the  fact  that  Mrs.  Fillmore  was  ill  and  Mr.  Fillmore 
for  the  time  being  unaware  that  residences  were  hung  with  black — or 
that  at  earliest  opportunity  the  house  was  appropriately  draped ; the 
affair  was  magnified  by  hostile  tongue  and  press,  until  one  might 
judge,  from  some  of  the  reports,  that  a vast  throng  of  his  respect- 
able fellow-townsmen  gathered  in  front  of  his  house  and  vied  with 
each  other  in  insulting  its  venerable  occupant.  That  the  affront  was 
the  work  of  but  a few,  and  they  of  the  most  ignoble,  is  the  testi- 
mony of  living  witnesses.  This,  and  the  alleged  hanging  of  Mr. 
Fillmore  in  effigy,  form  evil  episodes  in  the  war-time  history  of 
Buffalo,  but  leave  no  stain  on  the  character  of  the  man  against  whom 
the  outrages  were  directed. 

And  a few  days  later  it  was  Mr.  Fillmore’s  name  which  headed 
the  citizens’  committee  appointed  to  meet  the  Lincoln  funeral  train 
at  Batavia  (April  26,  1865)  and  serve  as  escort  to  Buffalo. 

1.  Mr.  Lincoln  arrived  in  Buffalo,  Saturday,  February  16,  1861.  On  Sun- 
day, Mr.  and  Mrs.  Fillmore  accompanied  him  to  the  First  Unitarian  church, 
where  they  listened  to  a sermon  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Hosmer.  In  the  evening,  the 
President  and  Mrs.  Fillmore  attended  a public  meeting  at  St.  James  Hall,  in 
behalf  of  certain  Western  Indian  tribes.  Numerous  anecdotes,  some  of  them 
very  likely  based  on  truth,  exist  to  this  day  in  Buffalo,  regarding  this  visit;  to 
record  them  here  would  be  to  impart  too  much  of  a Boswellian  character  to 
our  chronicle. 


XXX11 


INTRODUCTION. 


In  its  place  among  Mr.  Fillmore’s  miscellaneous  addresses  in 
Buffalo  will  be  found  his  remarks  on  receiving  a flag  for  the  Union 
Continentals  (July  4,  1861).  This  was  an  organization  of  well- 
known  men  of  Buffalo,  whose  chief  functions  were  to  stir  up  enthu- 
siasm and  act  as  escort  for  the  young  recruits  when  summoned  to 
the  front.  Mr.  Fillmore  was  the  first  commander  of  this  useful  and 
representative  Home  Guard.1 

The  first  departure  of  Buffalo  volunteers  for  the  Civil  War,  May 
3,  1861,  was  an  incident  important  enough  to  warrant  the  remark  of 
the  Commercial  Advertiser,  the  next  day: 

Of  all  the  noble  events  that  mark  the  history  of  the  Queen  City, 
not  one  can  match  with  that  of  yesterday.  Not  one  possessed  so 
much  of  proud  display,  excitement  and  significance,  or  contained 
one  half  its  touching  pathos.  The  departure  of  the  first  companies 
of  volunteers  for  the  war  of  1861,  will  be  an  ineffaceable  memory 
in  every  heart  among  the  throng  that  waved  them  adieu,  and  bade 
them  godspeed  with  ringing  cheers. 

The  four  companies  of  Buffalo  youths  who  marched  away  on 
this  occasion,  were  escorted  to  the  station  by  the  “Old  Guard,”  or 
Continentals,  under  the  command  of  ex-President  Fillmore,  “holding 
the  rank  of  major.”  “The  venerable  and  honored  commander,”  says 
the  report  just  quoted  from,  “ex-President  Fillmore,  marched  stately 
and  erect,  at  the  head  of  the  column,  wearing  a sword  and  plume, 
and  looking  like  an  emperor.” 

At  the  depot,  “ex-President  Fillmore,  uncovering  his  white  locks, 
and  raising  himself  to  his  full  height,  cries,  ‘Old  Guard,  attention ! 
Three  cheers  for  the  Buffalo  Volunteers !’  Every  head  in  the  ranks 
is  bare,  every  arm  is  lifted,  and  every  voice  shouts  a stentorian 
‘hurrah,  hurrah,  hurrah!’  Again  the  soldiers  hoarsely  respond — all 
but  a few  who,  with  faces  turned  from  the  scene,  were  soothing  the 
sorrowful  females  who  cling  to  their  skirts,  or  are  bidding  good-bye 
to  friends.” 

The  Union  Continentals,  under  Mr.  Fillmore’s  imposing  com- 
mand, figured  in  many  of  the  stirring  scenes  of  those  sad,  excited 
days.  On  one  Washington’s  Birthday  Mr.  Fillmore  led  his  com- 


1.  The  original  officers  of  the  Union  Continentals  of  Buffalo,  as  organized 
in  the  spring  of  1861,  were  as  follows:  Captain,  Millard  Fillmore;  first 
lieutenant,  Lewis  F.  Allen;  second  lieutenant,  Aaron  Rumsey;  third  lieutenant, 
Henry  W.  Rogers;  orderly  sergeant,  Justus  Spertzell;  second  orderly  sergeant, 
Asher  P.  Nichols;  third  orderly  sergeant,  Samuel  W.  Hawes;  fourth  orderly 
sergeant,  Orlando  Allen;  fifth  or  color  sergeant,  M.  Cadwallader;  first  corporal, 
Nathaniel  Wilgus;  second  corporal,  John  L.  Curtenius;  third  corporal,  William 
Williams;  fourth  corporal,  Valorus  Hodge;  surgeon,  Horatio  N.  Loomis; 
chaplain,  Rev.  John  C.  Lord,  D.  D. 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXX111 


pany  in  full  uniform  to  Dr.  Lord’s  church  (the  Central  Presby- 
terian), where,  after  prayer  by  the  chaplain,  Captain  Fillmore  read 
Washington’s  Farewell  Address,  and  national  airs  were  sung  by 
the  choir. 

Mr.  Fillmore’s  speech  at  the  great  Union  rally  at  the  Metropoli- 
tan Theater,  in  Buffalo,  April  16,  1861,  is  included  in  these  volumes. 
It  is  recorded  that  at  the  adjournment  of  that  meeting  the  happy 
finale  was  added  by  “ex-President  Fillmore,  the  chairman,  rising, 
swinging  his  hat,  and  leading  off  in  three  glorious  cheers  for  the 
Union  and  the  Constitution.”  But  the  proper  conclusion  is  only 
reached  with  the  added  fact  that  Mr.  Fillmore  contributed  $500  to 
the  support  of  families  of  volunteers,  and  that  his  was  the  first 
money  paid  for  this  cause  in  Buffalo. 

Mr.  Fillmore  was  chairman  of  the  Buffalo  Committee  of  Public 
Defense,  which  in  1862  called  the  attention  of  the  Federal  and  State 
governments  to  the  need  of  defense  on  the  Niagara  Frontier.  The 
very  interesting  letters  on  this  subject,  signed  by  Mr.  Fillmore,  will 
be  found  in  place  among  his  miscellaneous  correspondence. 


As  a citizen  of  Buffalo  Mr.  Fillmore  was  always,  in  a high  sense 
of  the  term,  public-spirited.  He  was  devoted  to  whatever  made  for 
better  conditions  of  living  or  higher  levels  of  thinking.  In  1832  we 
find  him  active  in  the  Buffalo  Lyceum.  In  1841  he  became  a life 
member  of  the  Young  Men’s  Association,  and  gave  liberally  to 
the  collection  of  books  which  was  the  basis  of  the  present  Buf- 
falo Public  Library.  Although  away  from  Buffalo  much  of  the 
time,  he  maintained  a singularly  active  part  in  many  local  en- 
terprises. The  Bar  Association  always  enlisted  his  interest  and 
on  various  occasions  he  presided  at  its  meetings,  notably  on  Sep- 
tember 9,  1847,  when  memorial  exercises  were  held  on  the  death 
of  Latham  A.  Burrows,  and  Mr.  Fillmore  wrote  the  resolutions. 
In  1850,  various  honors  came  to  him  in  consequence  of  his  official 
position.  He  was  made  chancellor  of  the  Smithsonian  Institution; 
but  with  unfailing  regard  for  Buffalo,  we  find  him,  January  19, 
1850,  presiding  at  a public  meeting  for  the  relief  of  the  poor  of  the 
city,  and  contributing  to  the  work.  His  addresses  in  the  follow- 
ing pages  testify  to  his  interest  in  the  Buffalo  General  Hospital,  of 
which  he  was  a founder,  and  president  in  1870;  in  the  University 
of  Buffalo,  of  which  he  was  chancellor,  1846-74;  of  the  Fine  Arts 
Academy,  at  the  inauguration  of  which  he  presided,  February  16, 
1865,  as  at  other  annual  openings;  of  the  Society  of  Natural  Sciences, 
for  which,  February  8,  1868,  his  name  headed  a list  of  Buffalo  citi- 


XXXIV 


INTRODUCTION. 


zens  who  constituted  a committee  to  devise  a plan  to  relieve  the 
necessities  of  the  society — the  plan  hit  upon  being  a ball,  which 
seems  to  have  been  truly  “a  brilliant  social  event.”  He  was  one 
of  the  directors  of  the  Buffalo  Club,  1867,  and  its  first  president ; an 
organizer  of  the  Society  in  Buffalo  for  the  Prevention  of  Cruelty  to 
Animals,  presiding  at  several  of  its  meetings  in  1867;  and  one  of 
the  founders  of  the  Buffalo  Historical  Society,  in  1862,  and  it$ 
president,  1862-67;  his  inaugural  address  was  given  at  old  American 
Hall,  July  1,  1862. 

In  May,  1857,  Mr.  Fillmore’s  name  headed  a list  of  citizens  who 
invited  Capt.  H.  A.  De  Riviere,  a veteran  of  the  French  army  in 
the  Crimea,  to  lecture  on  the  battles  of  that  campaign.  In  December, 
1863,  he  was  one  of  a number  of  Buffalo  gentlemen  who  were 
selected  as  trustees  for  a boys’  school  which  it  was  proposed  to 
establish.  In  the  following  January  he  presided  at  a meeting  of 
the  executive  committee  of  the  Great  Central  Fair,  to  be  opened 
February  22d,  and  later  was  made  its  president.  It  was  his  address 
on  this  occasion  which  brought  upon  him  the  maledictions  of  his 
enemies  and  embittered  many  who  theretofore  had  been  his  friends. 
His  words,  as  printed  at  the  time,  are  given  in  their  place  in  this 
collection,  with  some  quotation  from  contemporary  comment.  Mr. 
Fillmore  could  not  have  failed  to  feel  the  chill  in  the  social 
atmosphere,  but  he  kept  the  even  tenor  of  his  way  among  his  old 
neighbors,  holding  for  the  most  part  to  an  admirable  silence. 

In  1866  he  went  abroad  again  for  a few  months.  He  had  scarcely 
returned,  in  July,  when  Lieutenant-General  Sherman  arrived  in  Buf- 
falo, and  Mr.  Fillmore  was  among  those  who  welcomed  him — but 
others  made  the  speeches.  In  August  of  that  year  Mr.  Fillmore  was 
an  active  and  cordial  host,  as  one  of  the  local  committee  which 
entertained  delegates  to  a notable  meeting  in  Buffalo  of  the  Ameri- 
can Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science.  It  was  in  this 
month  also  that  he  headed  the  citizens’  committee  for  the  reception 
of  Andrew  Johnson,  and  was  chairman  of  the  joint  committee  of 
citizens  and  the  Common  Council. 

In  July,  1867,  at  a meeting  held  under  the  auspices  of  the  Buf- 
falo Historical  Society,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  appointed  president  of 
the  Soldiers’  Monument  Association  of  Erie  County,  “formed  to 
take  measures  to  ensure  the  erection  of  a suitable  monument  to  the 
heroic  dead  of  Erie  county  who  have  fallen  in  the  recent  war 
against  rebellion,  and  to  cooperate  with  the  public  authorities  and 
iOther  organizations  or  individuals  to  consummate  this  work.”  The 
vice-presidents  included  representatives  from  each  town  in  the 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXXV 


county,  and  it  was  proposed  to  turn  into  the  fund  a surplus  of  $5000 
from  the  Union  Continentals  fund.  The  project  was  not  at  that 
time  successful,  and  when  after  some  years  the  monument  was 
erected  it  was  by  the  efforts  of  another  organization.1 

Among  other  public  functions,  more  or  less  notable  in  the  annals 
of  Buffalo,  which  as  matter  of  record  should  be  included  here,  were : 
The  complimentary  dinner  to  Maj.-Gen.  William  F.  Barry,  at  the 
Tifft  House,  Buffalo,  October  24,  1867,  attended  by  some  eighty  of 
Buffalo’s  citizens,  and  presided  over  by  Mr.  Fillmore.  On  Decem- 
ber 9,  1870,  also  at  the  Tifft  House,  the  Buffalo  Board  of  Trade  gave 
a banquet  to  the  National  Board  of  Trade,  on  which  occasion  we 
find  Mr.  Fillmore  responding  to  a toast  in  his  honor.  Later  in  the 
same  month,  he  shared  in  the  entertainment  of  the  Grand  Duke 
Alexis  at  the  Buffalo  Club,  and  escorted  him  to  Fort  Porter.  Two 
years  later  (November  28,  1872,)  Mr.  Fillmore  presided  at  a Thanks- 
giving dinner  to  the  newsboys  and  bootblacks  of  Buffalo,  given  in 
Grace  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  under  the  auspices  of  the  Young 
Men’s  Christian  Association;  and  on  December  23d  of  that  year,  at 
the  tenth  anniversary  of  the  Buffalo  Fine  Arts  Academy,  he  unveiled 
a portrait  of  the  artist  L.  G.  Sellstedt  which  had  been  bought  for 
the  permanent  collection.  This  enumeration  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  activi- 
ties, even  to  the  last  year  of  his  life,  might  be  extended;  but  the 
foregoing  may  suffice  to  show  his  active  share  in  the  worthy  enter- 
prises of  his  home  city,  and  the  character  of  his  interests. 

An  incident  of  a late  year  of  his  life,  not  without  its  illustrative 
value,  was  his  signing  (November,  1868)  a petition  addressed  to 
Governor  Reuben  E.  Fenton,  asking  for  a commutation  of  a sentence 
of  death  to  life  imprisonment  for  Kate  Johnson,  convicted  of  mur- 
der in  the  first  degree. 


Mr.  Fillmore  was  not  an  eloquent  speaker,  nor  a felicitous  writer. 
His  use  of  metaphor  or  simile  was  seldom  happy ; but  his  expression 
was  never  obscure,  and  it  reflected,  in  spite  of  minor  flaws,  his 
suavity  of  manner,  his  consideration  of  others,  and  his  high  respect 
for  himself.  His  one  guiding  star,  his  criterion  of  political  right, 
throughout  his  public  career,  was  the  Constitution.  It  is  curious  to 


1.  The  Buffalo  Historical  Society  never  lost  sight  of  the  project,  and  it 
was  finally  under  its  auspices  that  the  cornerstone  of  the  Soldiers’  and  Sailors’ 
Monument,  erected  by  the  city  of  Buffalo  and  the  Ladies’  Monument  Associa- 
tion, was  laid  on  July  4,  1882,  in  the  fiftieth  year  of  Buffalo’s  existence  as  a 
city. 


XXXVI 


INTRODUCTION. 


note  his  allusions  to  it,  time  and  again,  in  speeches  and  in  cor- 
respondence. That  it  was  an  honest  devotion  to  the  fundamental 
law  of  his  country,  is  beyond  doubt.  “Whatever  may  be  my  fate 
personally,”  he  is  quoted  as  saying,  “is  not  worth  a thought,  if  the 
integrity  of  the  Constitution  can  be  maintained,  and  we  can  transmit 
this  glorious  heritage  unimpaired  to  our  posterity.” 

Of  his  engaging  personality,  much  has  elsewhere  been  written, 
and  much  might  be  added,  were  this  the  place  for  it.  And  of  his 
habits,  the  following  in  his  own  words — as  quoted  from  a conversa- 
tion with  a friend,  about  1870 — may  suffice: 

“I  have  taken  but  one  dose  of  medicine  in  thirty  years,  and  that 
was  forced  upon  me  unnecessarily.  I attribute  my  good  health  to 
the  fact  of  an  originally  strong  constitution,  to  an  education  on  a 
farm  and  to  life-long  habits  of  regularity  and  temperance.  I never 
smoked  or  chewed  tobacco.  I never  knew  intoxication.  Throughout 
all  my  public  life  I maintained  the  same  regularity  and  systematic 
habit  of  living  to  which  I had  previously  been  accustomed.  I never 
allowed  my  usual  hours  for  sleep  to  be  interrupted.  The  Sabbath 
I always  kept  as  a day  of  rest.  Besides  being  a religious  duty,  it 
was  essential  to  health.  On  commencing  my  Presidential  career  I 
found  that  the  Sabbath  had  frequently  been  employed  by  visitors 
for  private  interviews  with  the  President.  I determined  to  put  an 
end  to  the  custom,  and  ordered  a door-keeper  to  meet  all  Sunday 
visitors  with  an  indiscriminate  refusal.  While  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee on  Ways  and  Means  in  Congress,  and  during  my  entire  Presi- 
dential career,  my  labors  were  always  onerous  and  even  excessive, 
but  I never  suffered  a hour  of  sickness  throughout  them  all.” 

Mr.  Fillmore’s  fatal  illness  dated  from  February  13,  1874.  On 
the  morning  of  that  day,  as  he  was  shaving,  his  left  hand  suddenly 
fell  powerless,  and  the  paralysis  soon  extended  to  the  left  side  of 
his  face.  Two  weeks  later  he  had  a second  attack,  and  the  end 
came  on  March  8th. 


Mr.  Fillmore’s  letters,  here  collected,  have  been  copied  for  this 
publication  from  the  originals  in  many  places.  Those  drawn  from 
the  Departments  at  Washington  are  duly  indicated  as  printed.  The 
Chase,  Clayton,  Corwin,  Crittenden,  Pierce,  Polk  and  Webster  col- 
lections in  the  Library  of  Congress  have  all  yielded  something. 
Other  sources  that  have  proved  fruitful  are  the  New  Hampshire 
Historical  Society,  with  its  valuable  Webster  manuscripts;  the  His- 
torical Society  of  Pennsylvania,  the  Historical  Society  of  Wisconsin, 
the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society,  Boston;  the  Virginia  Histori- 
cal Society,  Richmond;  the  Tennessee  Historical  Society,  Nashville; 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXX  Vll 


the  Albany  Institute,  Albany,  N.  Y. ; the  Chicago  Historical  Society ; 
the  New  York  Public  Library,  Lenox  branch;  the  Oneida  Historical 
Society,  Utica,  N.  Y.,  and  the  public  libraries  of  Utica  and  Buffalo. 
The  Buffalo  Historical  Society,  the  natural  heritor  of  many  of  Mr. 
Fillmore’s  papers,  owns  of  his  original  manuscripts,  the  autobiog- 
raphy, three  addresses,  and  a few  letters. 

Special  and  grateful  acknowledgment,  for  the  use  of  Fillmore 
letters,  is  due  to  Mrs.  Emily  B.  Alward,  Miss  Ida  Haven,  Mr. 
Harvey  Putnam,  Mr.  Walter  J.  Shepard,  and  heirs  of  the  late  R.  B. 
Adam,  Buffalo;  Mrs.  Emily  Weed  Hollister,  Rochester,  N.  Y. ; Miss 
Hilda  Millet,  77  Mt.  Vernon  street,  Boston,  Mass.;  Miss  G.  Adelaide 
Slade,  Hamilton,  N.  Y. ; Mr.  William  Slade,  Kelloggsville,  N.  Y. ; 
Mr.  Thos.  R.  Proctor,  Utica,  N.  Y. ; Gen.  Jas.  Grant  Wilson,  Mr. 
Adrian  H.  Joline,  Mr.  H.  L.  Ehrich,  and  Mr.  Geo.  B.  Richmond, 
New  York  City;  Miss  Anna  L.  Riley,  East  Aurora,  N.  Y. ; Mrs. 
Geo.  W.  Patterson,  Westfield,  N.  Y. 

It  should  be  noted,  that  where  Mr.  Fillmore’s  original  manu- 
script has  been  available,  for  this  publication,  his  own  spelling  and 
style  of  capitalization  and  punctuation  have  been  followed. 

F.  H.  S. 


I 


CONTENTS 


Page. 

Officers  of  the  Society iii 

List  of  Presidents  of  the  Society iv 

Introduction  to  Fillmore  Papers v 

Millard  Fillmore  Chronology xliii 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  AUTOBIOGRAPHY  OF  EAR- 
LIER YEARS i 

GENEALOGICAL  DATA  RELATING  TO  MILLARD 

FILLMORE’S  ANCESTRY 17 

JOHN  FILLMORE  “NARRATIVE” 27 

MILLARD  FILLMORE  IN  THE  NEW  YORK  LEGISLA- 
TURE   41 

PAMPHLET  ON  RELIGIOUS  TESTS  FOR  WITNESSES  67 
SPEECHES  AND  DEBATES  AS  REPRESENTATIVE  IN 

CONGRESS 83 

On  the  case  of  Abraham  Fobes 86 

On  the  General  Appropriation  bill 89 

On  the  Specie  Tender  bill 98 

On  the  Fortification  bill 99 

On  the  National  Bank 101 

On  viva  voce  Elections 102 

On  the  abolition  of  Slavery  in  the  District  of  Colum- 
bia   108 

On  the  Surplus  Revenue  bili 109 

On  the  Treasury  Note  bill 133 

On  the  Upper  Canada  Rebellion  135 

On  the  late  Hon.  William  Patterson 137 

On  Lake  Navigation  interests 139 

On  Northern  Frontier  protection 141 

On  viva  voce  voting 146 

On  the  New  Jersey  contested  Election  Cases  ....  148 

On  Frontier  Defense 156 

On  the  Caroline  affair . 158 


xxxix 


xl 


CONTENTS. 


Page. 

On  the  Rights  of  Members  of  the  House  of  Represen- 
tatives   160 

On  the  case  of  McLeod 161 

On  Frontier  Defense 165 

On  the  Twelve  Million  Dollar  loan 167 

On  the  Fortification  bill 168 

On  the  Revenue  bill,  July  24,  1841 170 

On  Tea  and  Coffee  duties 19° 

On  Powers  of  the  Executive 190 

On  a Uniform  Bankrupt  Law 191 

On  the  Bankrupt  bill,  January  15,  1842 194 

On  the  Tariff  bill,  June  9,  1842 196 

On  the  plan  of  an  Exchequer 237 

On  various  Measures 245 

AS  COMPTROLLER  OF  NEW  YORK  STATE 249 

Letters  as  Comptroller 252 

On  Banking  in  New  York  State 275 

AS  VICE-PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  ...  285 

Inaugural  address  to  the  Senate 287 

Address  to  the  Senate,  on  Rules  of  Order 289 

AS  PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 297 

Calendar  of  Messages  and  Proclamations 300 

Suppressed  portion  of  the  Message  of  December  6,  1852, 

regarding  Slavery 311 

OFFICIAL  LETTERS  TO  HEADS  OF  DEPARTMENTS  325 
ADDRESSES,  POLITICAL  AND  OFFICIAL,  1840  TO  1856  401 

ADDRESSES,  NEW  ENGLAND  VISIT  OF  1851 420 

ADDRESSES,  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854 429 

ADDRESSES,  WESTERN  TOUR  OF  1854 441 

ENTERTAINED  IN  LONDON 444 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 

Portrait,  Millard  Fillmore,  after  oil  painting  by  F . 

B.  Carpenter Frontispiece 

Portrait,  Abigail  Powers  Fillmore Faces  page  17 

Portrait,  Millard  Powers  Fillmore “ “ 25 

Portrait,  Mary  Abigail  Fillmore “ “ 41 

Portrait,  Millard  Fillmore,  aet.  42 “ “ 193 

Harrison  and  Tyler  Log  Cabin,  Buffalo  ....  “ “ 403 


Errata. — Page  18.  The  allusion  to  Millard  Fillmore  as  John 
Fillmore’s  “grandson,”  should  read  “great-grandson.” 

Page  235,  third  line  from  bottom : “The  Madisonian  of  the  same 
city”  [New  York]  should  read:  “of  Washington.” 


xli 


MILLARD  FILLMORE  CHRONOLOGY 


1800.  Jan.  7.  Born  at  Locke,  now  Summerhill,  Cayuga  county, 
New  York. 

1815.  At  work  wool-carding  and  cloth-dressing. 

1821.  Moved  to  Aurora  (now  East  Aurora,  Erie  county),  New 

York. 

1822.  Read  law  in  Buffalo,  but  lived  in  Aurora  till  spring,  1830. 

1823.  Admitted  to  practice,  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  in  Buffalo. 
1823-30.  Practiced  law  in  Aurora. 

1826.  Feb.  5.  Married  Abigail,  daughter  of  Rev.  Lemuel  Powers. 

1827.  Admitted  to  the  bar,  as  attorney  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

1828.  May  22.  Delegate  to  the  Erie  county  convention  of  the  Na- 

tional Republicans;  member  of  the  county  committee  from 
Aurora;  endorsed  John  Quincy  Adams. 

1828.  Nov.  Elected  to  the  New  York  Assembly,  as  candidate  of 

the  Anti-Masonic  party. 

1829.  Admitted  as  counsellor,  New  York  Supreme  Court. 

1829.  Reelected  to  New  York  Assembly. 

1830.  Reelected  to  New  York  Assembly. 

1831.  Jan.  4.  Took  seat  for  third  time  in  New  York  Assembly. 

Distinguished  himself  by  drafting  and  advocating  act  to 
abolish  imprisonment  for  debt;  bill  passed  April  26,  1831. 

1832.  April.  Law  firm  of  Clary  & Fillmore  formed. 

1832.  Elected  Representative  in  Twenty-third  Congress. 

1833.  Dec.  2.  First  took  seat  in  House  of  Representatives. 

1834.  Law  firm  of  Fillmore  & Hall  formed. 

1836.  Jan.  10.  Law  firm  of  Fillmore,  Hall  & Haven  formed. 

1836.  Oct.  4.  Renominated  for  Representative  in  Twenty-fifth  Con- 
gress; later  elected. 

1838.  Reelected  Representative  in  Twenty-sixth  Congress. 

1840.  Reelected  Representative  in  Twenty-seventh  Congress;  chair- 
man of  Ways  and  Means  committee;  “leader  of  the  House." 
1842.  June  9.  Made  his  famous  tariff  speech  in  the  House. 

1842.  Declined  renomination  to  Congress. 


xliii 


xliv 


MILLARD  FILLMORE  CHRONOLOGY. 


1844.  May.  Candidate  for  Vice-President  in  the  Whig  National 
convention  at  Baltimore. 

Sept.  11.  Nominated  for  Governor  of  New  York;  defeated 
by  Silas  Wright. 

1846-74.  Chancellor,  University  of  Buffalo. 

1847.  Oct.  6.  Nominated  for  Comptroller,  New  York  State,  in  the 
Whig  State  convention  at  Syracuse. 

1847.  Nov.  2.  Elected  Comptroller,  New  York  State. 

1848.  Jan.  1.  Assumed  office  as  Comptroller. 

June  9.  Nominated  for  Vice-President  by  the  Whig  National 
convention. 

Nov.  Elected  Vice-President. 

1849.  Feb.  20.  Resigned  as  New  York  Comptroller. 

March  4.  Inaugurated  Vice-President. 

1850.  July  10.  Took  oath  of  office  as  President  of  the  United  States. 
Sept.  18.  Approved  Fugitive  Slave  Act. 

1851.  July  4.  Laid  the  corner-stone  of  the  Capitol  extension. 

1852.  June  16-21.  Unsuccessful  Whig  candidate  for  Presidential 

nomination  in  the  Whig  National  convention  at  Baltimore. 

1853.  March  4.  Retired  from  the  Presidency. 

March  30.  Mrs.  Fillmore  died  at  Washington. 

1855.  May  17.  Sailed  for  Liverpool. 

1856.  Feb.  22.  Nominated  for  President  by  the  American  party  at 

Philadelphia. 

May  21.  Wrote  his  letter  of  acceptance  at  Paris. 

1856.  June  22.  Arrived  in  New  York. 

1856.  Nov.  Overwhelmingly  defeated  in  the  election,  receiving  only 
the  eight  electoral  votes  of  Maryland. 

1858.  Feb.  10.  Married  Mrs.  Caroline  C.  McIntosh. 

1862.  Chairman,  Buffalo  Committee  of  Public  Defense. 

1862.  One  of  the  incorporators,  Buffalo  Fine  Arts  Academy. 

1862.  May  20.  Chosen  president,  Buffalo  Historical  Society,  which 
he  had  helped  to  found;  reelected  yearly,  1862-67. 

1865.  Dec.  8.  Executed  his  last  will  and  testament.  Codicils  dated 

September  19,  1868,  and  April  28,  1873. 

1866.  Visited  Europe  with  his  second  wife. 

1866.  July  13.  Arrived  in  Buffalo,  from  his  second  European  trip. 
1867-68.  First  president,  Buffalo  Club,  and  one  of  its  founders. 
1870.  President,  Buffalo  General  Hospital. 

1870-74.  Trustee,  Grosvenor  Library,  Buffalo. 

1874.  March  8.  Died  at  his  home  in  Buffalo. 


MILLARD  FILLMORE 
VOLUME  ONE 


PAPERS 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S 


AUTOBIOGRAPHY 

OF  HIS 


EARLIER  YEARS 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH 


NARRATIVE  OF  HIS  EARLY  YEARS 


WRITTEN  BY  HIMSELF1 

I have  been  requested  to  state  some  of  the  early  incidents 
of  my  life  for  the  benefit  of  the  Buffalo  Historical  Society ; 
and  in  compliance  with  that  request  I proceed  at  once  to  the 
task.  Believing  that  an  humble  origin  affords  no  just  cause 
of  concealment  or  shame, — and  certainly  not,  even  when 
fortune  has  smiled,  for  vain-boasting  and  self-glorification, 
— I shall  content  myself  by  stating  that  I am  the  second 
child  and  eldest  son  of  Nathaniel  Fillmore  and  Phoebe 
Millard.  I was  born  in  Locke  (now  Summer  Hill),  Cayuga 
County,  New  York,  on  the  seventh  day  of  January,  1800. 
My  father  was  a native  of  Bennington,  Vermont;  and  my 
mother  was  a native  of  Pittsfield,  Massachusetts.  They 
were  early  settlers  in  what  was  then  known  as  “The  Military 
Tract.”  At  the  time  of  my  birth,  my  father  and  his  brother 
Calvin,  and  their  wives,  occupied  the  same  log  house  in  the 
midst  of  the  forest,  having  no  neighbor  nearer  than  four 
miles.  About  two  years  after  my  birth,  my  father  met  with 
what  seemed  at  the  time  a great  misfortune;  but  was  (at 
least  so  far  as  I was  concerned)  a blessing  in  disguise.  He 

1.  This  autobiography  of  the  late  Millard  Fillmore  was  written  in  1871, 
at  the  request  of  the  Buffalo  Historical  Society,  and  deposited  by  him  in  its 
archives,  under  seal,  not  to  be  opened  until  after  his  death.  It  is  printed  in 
Vol.  II  of  the  Society’s  Publications,  issued  in  1880,  but  for  some  years  out 
of  print. 


4 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH. 


lost  all  his  property  through  a bad  title  to  the  property 
which  he  had  purchased.  I say  this  was  a blessing  in  dis- 
guise, as  the  township  where  he  had  located,  being  high  and 
cold,  was  one  of  the  poorest  in  the  whole  Military  Tract, 
and  far  removed  from  any  thoroughfare  or  central  point  of 
business.  In  other  words,  it  was  completely  shut  out  from 
all  the  enterprises  of  civilization  and  advancement,  and  re- 
mained so  for  more  than  half  a century.  My  father  then 
left  the  town,  and  removed  into  what  was  then  Sempronius 
(now  Niles),  in  the  same  county.  Here  he  took  a perpetual 
lease  of  a small  farm  of  about  one  hundred  and  thirty  acres, 
wholly  uncultivated,  and  covered  with  heavy  timber.  He 
built  a small  log  house  and  commenced  clearing  the  land; 
and  it  was  at  this  place  and  in  these  pursuits  that  I first 
knew  anything  of  life.  That  farm  is  about  one  mile  west  of 
Skaneateles  Lake,  ten  miles  from  its  outlet,  and  about  one 
mile  east  of  a little  hamlet  called  Newhope. 

I had,  like  most  boys,  a great  passion  for  hunting  and 
fishing,  but  my  father  was  very  unwilling  to  indulge  it.  He 
used  to  tell  me  that  no  man  ever  prospered  who  spent  much 
of  his  time  in  hunting  and  fishing;  and  that  those  employ- 
ments were  only  fit  for  Indians,  or  white  men  no  better  than 
they.  Consequently,  I had  no  gun,  and  could  only  enjoy  the 
sport  of  shooting  when  I could  borrow  of  a neighbor. 
Nevertheless,  when  I had  any  spare  time  I used  to  go  down 
to  . the  lake,  and  fish  and  bathe  in  its  limpid  waters.  It  was 
indeed  one  of  the  clearest  and  most  beautiful  lakes  which  I 
have  ever  seen.  The  canoe  seemed  suspended  in  mid-air, 
and  the  fish  could  be  seen  at  great  depths. 

The  town  of  Niles,  and  especially  that  part  of  it,  was 
then  very  sparsely  settled.  There  were  no  schools,  except 
such  as  were  improvised  for  the  summer,  and  taught  by  a 
woman  of  very  limited  education.  The  first  that  I recollect 
was  at  Newhope,  in  an  old  deserted  log  house,  which  had 
been  furnished  with  a few  benches  without  backs,  and  a 
board  for  writing  upon.  In  this  school  I learned  my  alpha- 
bet, at  the  age  of  six  or  seven.  Of  course  nothing  was 
taught  but  the  most  simple  lessons  in  spelling  and  reading. 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH. 


5 


When  I was  about  ten  years  old,  a man  was  employed  by 
the  name  of  Amos  Castle,  who  gave  us  some  instruction  in 
writing  and  arithmetic,  and  drilled  us  most  thoroughly  in 
Webster’s  spelling-book.  I think  I went  through  that  book 
without  missing  in  the  spelling  of  a word;  but  I did  not 
learn  the  definition  of  a single  one.  In  fact,  there  was  no 
such  thing  as  a dictionary  in  school,  and  I had  never  seen 
one.  From  about  the  age  of  ten  or  eleven,  I could  not  be 
spared  from  the  farm  during  the  summer,  and  therefore, 
only  attended  school  for  two  or  three  months  in  the  winter. 
Consequently,  I forgot  nearly  as  much  during  the  summer 
as  I learned  in  the  winter.  I,  however,  acquired  some 
knowledge  of  arithmetic,  and  read  Dwight’s  old  geography 
of  questions  and  answers  enough  to  have  acquired  some 
knowledge  of  geography,  had  there  been  any  such  thing  as 
a map  or  atlas  in  school;  but  I never  saw  either  till  I was 
nineteen  years  of  age. 

When  I was  about  twelve  or  thirteen,  some  effort  was 
made  to  organize  a school  under  our  present  admirable  sys- 
tem of  common  schools;  and  after  that  there  was  some 
improvement  in  our  teachers.  One  scholar  had  a copy  of 
Morse’s  geography,  which  he  permitted  me  to  look  at,  and  I 
devoured  it  with  the  greatest  avidity.  I recollect  well  the 
impression  made  upon  me  by  the  account  given  of  Bruce’s 
travels  in  Abyssinia. 

I continued  thus  to  work  upon  the  farm  in  summer,  till  I 
was  in  my  fifteenth  year.  During  that  time,  being  large  of 
my  age  and  unusually  strong,  I learned  to  plow,  to  hoe,  to 
chop,  to  log  and  clear  land,  to  mow,  to  reap,  and,  finally,  to 
do  all  kinds  of  work  which  is  usually  done  in  clearing  and 
cultivating  a new  farm.  But  my  father’s  misfortune  in 
losing  his  land,  and  the  scarcely  less  misfortune  of  having 
a hard,  clayey  soil  for  cultivation,  gave  him  a great  distaste 
for  farming;  and  he  was,  therefore,  anxious  that  his  sons 
should  follow  some  other  occupation.  His  means  did  not 
justify  him  or  them  in  aspiring  to  any  profession,  and,  there- 
fore, he  wished  them  to  learn  trades.  In  the  fall  of  1814, 
a neighbor  had  been  drafted  into  the  military  service  for 


6 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH. 


three  months,  and  he  offered  me  what  I regarded  as  a very 
liberal  sum  to  take  his  place  as  a substitute.  I was  foolish 
enough  to  desire  to  accept  the  offer,  but  at  the  same  time  a 
man  by  the  name  of  Benjamin  Hunger  ford,  formerly  a near 
neighbor,  but  then  living  in  Sparta,  Livingston  County,  N. 
Y.,  where  he  had  established  the  business  of  carding  and 
cloth-dressing,  came  to  my  father  and  proposed  to  take  me 
on  trial  for  three  months;  then,  if  we  were  both  suited,  I 
was  to  become  an  apprentice  to  the  business.  My  father 
persuaded  me  to  abandon  the  idea  of  becoming  a soldier, 
and  to  go  home  with  Mr.  Hungerford  to  learn  a trade.  He 
had  come  with  an  old  team  to  purchase  dye-woods  and  other 
materials  for  his  business — his  load  was  very  heavy  and 
the  roads  very  bad — consequently  I had  to  go  on  foot  most 
of  the  way,  something  like  a hundred  miles ; but  I endured 
this  very  well. 

Up  to  this  time  I had  never  spent  two  days  away  from 
home,  and  my  habits  and  tastes  were  somewhat  peculiar. 
For  instance,  I was  very  fond  of  bread-and-milk,  and  usually 
ate  it  three  times  a day,  regardless  of  what  others  ate.  And 
here  I will  say,  I think  that  this  early  habit,  and  the  thor- 
ough training  afforded  by  out-door  exercise  on  a farm,  gave 
me  a constitution  and  digestive  powers  which  have  enabled 
me  to  preserve  my  health  under  all  the  vicissitudes  of  a 
varied  life;  and  to  my  uniform  good  health  and  temperate 
habits  I am  chiefly  indebted,  under  Providence,  for  any  suc- 
cess I have  attained.  But  I found,  when  I got  to  Sparta, 
that  milk  was  a luxury  in  which  I could  but  seldom  indulge. 
On  the  contrary,  I was  compelled  to  eat  boiled  salt  pork, 
which  I detested,  with,  occasionally,  pudding  and  milk,  and 
buckwheat  cakes,  or  starve.  This  was  very  hard,  but  I did 
not  complain.  I was,  however,  more  disappointed  at  the  work 
I was  required  to  do.  I had  become  anxious  to  learn  the 
trade,  and  supposed  I should  be  put  at  once  into  the  shop ; 
instead  of  which  I was  set  to  chopping  wood  for  a coal  pit. 
I probably  manifested  some  disappointment,  but  I was 
reconciled  to  the  work  by  being  told  that  charcoal  was  indis- 
pensable for  cloth  dressing ; that  I might  be  so  situated  that 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH. 


7 


I could  not  purchase,  and  that  therefore  it  was  necessary  to 
know  how  to  make  and  burn  a coal  pit. 

I was  the  youngest  apprentice,  and  soon  found  that  I had 
to  chop  most  of  the  wood,  having  very  little  opportunity  to 
work  in  the  shop ; and  as  it  seemed  to  me  that  I was  made 
to  enslave  myself  without  any  corresponding  benefit,  I 
became  exceedingly  sore  under  this  servitude.  One  day 
when  I had  been  chopping  in  the  woods,  I came  into  the 
shop  just  before  dark,  tired  and  dissatisfied;  and  Mr.  Hun- 
ger ford  told  me  to  take  my  ax  and  go  up  on  the  hill  and  cut 
some  wood  for  the  shop.  I took  up  my  ax,  and  said  (per- 
haps not  very  respectfully)  that  I did  not  come  there  to  learn 
to  chop ; and  immediately  left  without  waiting  for  a reply. 
I went  on  to  the  hill,  mounted  a log,  and  commenced  chop- 
ping. Mr.  Hungerford  soon  followed  me  up,  and,  coming 
near,  asked  me  if  I thought  I was  abused  because  I had  to 
chop  wood.  I told  him  I did ; that  I came  there  for  no  such 
purpose,  and  could  learn  to  chop  at  home;  and  that  I was 
not  disposed  to  submit  to  it.  He  said  that  I must  obey  his 
orders.  I said:  “Yes,  if  they  are  right;  otherwise  I will 
not;  and  I have  submitted  to  this  injustice  long  enough.’’ 
He  said : “I  will  chastise  you  for  your  disobedience” ; and 
stepped  towards  me,  as  I stood  upon  the  log,  with  my  ax 
in  my  hand.  I was  burning  with  indignation,  and  felt 
keenly  the  injustice  and  insult,  and  said  to  him,  “You  will 
not  chastise  me”;  and,  raising  my  ax,  said,  “If  you  ap- 
proach me  I will  split  you  down.”  He  looked  at  me  for  a 
minute,  and  I looked  at  him;  when  he  turned  and  walked 
off.  I am  very  glad  that  he  did  so;  for  I was  in  a frenzy 
of  anger,  and  know  not  what  I might  have  done.  I had 
dwelt  in  silence  and  solitude  upon  what  I deemed  his  injus- 
tice, until  I had  become  morbidly  sensitive;  and  his  spark 
of  insolent  tyranny  kindled  the  whole  into  a flame.  I do 
not  justify  my  threat,  and  sincerely  regret  it;  but  the  truth 
must  be  told. 

The  next  day  he  asked  me  if  I wished  to  go  home.  I 
told  him  I was  ready  to  go,  or  would  stay  the  three  months 
for  which  I came,  if  I could  be  employed  in  the  shop.  He 


8 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH. 


said  I might  be,  and  so  I remained  until  the  time  was  up; 
when  I shouldered  my  knapsack,  containing  bread  and  dried 
venison,  and  returned  to  my  father’s  on  foot  and  alone. 
Mr.  Hungerford  came  after  me  next  year,  but  I refused  to 
go  with  him. 

I think  that  this  injustice,  which  was  no  more  than  other 
apprentices  have  suffered  and  will  suffer,  had  a marked 
effect  upon  my  character.  It  made  me  feel  for  the  weak  and 
unprotected,  and  hate  the  insolent  tyrant  in  every  station  of 
life.  Some  acts  of  tyranny  during  the  late  rebellion,  have 
made  my  blood  boil  with  indignation;  but  perhaps  I was 
wrong,  since  the  country  at  large  seems  to  have  borne  them 
with  more  than  Christian  patience  and  humility. 

One  other  incident  that  occurred  during  these  three 
months  of  servitude,  may  be  mentioned.  The  only  holiday 
which  I was  allowed  was  the  first  day  of  January,  1815; 
when  I went,  with  the  other  employes  of  the  shop,  to  the 
house  of  a Mr.  Duncan,  where  the  day  was  to  be  celebrated. 
There  I witnessed  for  the  first  time  the  rude  sports  in  which 
people  engage  in  a new  country;  such  as  wrestling,  jump- 
ing, hopping,  firing  at  turkeys  and  raffling  for  them,  and 
drinking  whisky.  I was  a spectator  of  the  scene ; taking  no 
part,  except  that  I raffled  once  for  the  turkey  that  was 
perched  up  in  one  corner  of  the  room,  and  won  it.  No  per- 
suasion could  induce  me  to  raffle  again;  and  that  was  the 
beginning  and  end  of  my  gambling,  if  it  might  be  called 
such,  as  I have  never  since  gambled  to  the  value  of  a cent.1 

In  1815,  I commenced  my  apprenticeship  with  Zaccheus 

1.  Apropos  of  this  trait  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  character  is  an  anecdote  long 
current  in  Buffalo.  When  Mr.  Fillmore  was  practicing  law  in  the  local  courts, 
he  was  known  as  a pretty  formidable  antagonist.  On  one  occasion  a witty 
lawyer  by  the  name  of  Talcott  was  his  opponent.  Wishing  to  show  to  the 
jury  how  strongly  the  rival  side  of  the  case  was  fortified,  he  made  use  of  a 
phrase  which  he  presumed  would  come  home  to  their  feelings.  “Not  only,” 
said  he,  “have  my  client’s  rights  been  thus  invaded,  but  also,  in  order  to  sus- 
tain that  inroad,  you  find  arrayed  against  him  the  best  talent  in  the  country 
— I may  say,  the  right  bower  of  the  profession!” 

“What  does  the  gentleman  on  the  opposite  side  mean  by  the  ‘right  bower’?” 
asked  Mr.  Fillmore,  who  had  never  played  a game  of  euchre  in  his  life. 

“Why,”  said  Talcott,  with  a sly  wink  at  the  jury,  “I  thought  everybody 
knew  what  that  meant — the  biggest  knave  in  the  pack!” 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH. 


9 


Cheney  and  Alvan  Kellogg,  who  carried  on  the  business  of 
carding  and  cloth-dressing  at  Newhope,  near  my  father’s 
residence.  I was  not  indentured,  but  the  verbal  bargain 
was,  that  I was  to  serve  during  the  season  of  wool-carding 
and  cloth-dressing — which  usually  lasted  from  about  the 
first  of  June  to  the  middle  of  December — until  I arrived  at 
the  age  of  twenty ; for  which  I was  to  be  taught  the  trade, 
and  receive  fifty-five  dollars  for  each  year,  except  the  last, 
when  the  amount  was  to  be  increased.  This  was  thought  to 
be  sufficient  for  my  clothing  and  spending  money,  and  all 
the  rest  of  my  time  and  earnings  belonged  to  my  father, 
who  had  a large  family  and  a sickly  wife  to  support.  I was 
well  pleased  with  my  situation,  and  all  things  went  on 
smoothly  and  satisfactorily.  The  apparent  impossibility  of 
anything  better  or  higher  suppressed  hope,  and  enforced 
contentment.  I went  to  school  some,  during  the  winters  of 
1816  and  1817,  and  worked  on  the  farm  during  the  spring. 
I had  thus  far  had  no  access  to  books,  beyond  the  school- 
books which  I had ; as  my  father’s  library  consisted  only  of 
a Bible,  hymn-book  and  almanac,  and  sometimes  a little 
weekly  paper  from  Auburn;  but  in  1817  or  1818  a small 
circulating  library  was  established  in  the  town,  and  I man- 
aged to  get  a share,  which  cost  me  two  dollars.  Then,  for 
the  first  time,  I began  to  read  miscellaneous  works.  Still,  I 
had  very  little  leisure  to  indulge  in  this  luxury.  I read 
without  method  or  object;  nevertheless,  I read  enough  to 
see  the  need  of  a better  knowledge  of  the  definition  of 
words.  I,  therefore,  bought  a small  dictionary,  and  deter- 
mined to  seek  out  the  meaning  of  every  word  occurring  in 
my  reading,  which  I did  not  understand.  While  attending 
the  carding  machines,  I used  to  place  the  dictionary  on  the 
desk — by  which  I passed  every  two  minutes  in  feeding  the 
machines  and  removing  the  rolls — and  in  this  way  I could 
have  a moment  in  which  to  look  at  a word  and  read  its 
definition,  and  could  then  fix  it  in  my  memory.  This  I 
found  quite  successful. 

The  winter  that  I was  eighteen  years  of  age,  I was  em- 
ployed to  teach  a country  school  in  the  town  of  Scott,  at  the 


10 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH. 


head  of  Skaneateles  Lake.  This  was  at  that  time  a very 
rough  and  uncultivated  place,  where  the  boys,  the  winter 
before,  had  driven  out  the  teacher  and  broken  up  the  school. 
It  was  not  long  before  I saw  that  the  question  who  was 
master,  had  got  to  be  decided.  One  of  the  boys  set  my 
authority  at  defiance — evidently  with  the  intention  of  bring- 
ing on  a fight.  I ordered  him  up  for  chastisement.  Imme- 
diately, the  larger  boys  sprang  to  their  feet,  and  one  at- 
tempted to  seize  the  wooden  poker,  but  I was  too  quick  for 
him,  and  raising  it,  I stamped  my  foot,  and  told  them  to  sit 
down — and  they  obeyed.  I punished  the  guilty  one  without 
further  interference ; but  it  raised  a breeze  in  the  neighbor- 
hood. A school  meeting  was  called,  which  I was  invited  to 
attend,  and  did.  I then  found  it  to  have  been  represented, 
that  I punished  scholars  with  the  poker.  I stated  the  facts, 
and  told  them  that  I was  ready  to  quit  the  school  if  they 
desired  it;  but  that  while  I remained,  I should  be  master, 
even  if  I used  the  poker  in  self-defense.  After  some  dis- 
cussion they  concluded  that  the  school  should  go  on,  and  I 
had  no  further  trouble.  After  my  school  closed,  finding 
nothing  better  to  turn  my  hand  to,  I attended  a saw-mill  for 
a month  or  two,  and  then  shouldered  my  knapsack,  and  came 
out  to  Buffalo,  to  visit  some  relatives  and  see  the  country. 

That  was  in  May,  1818,  and  Buffalo  then  presented  a 
straggling  appearance.  It  was  just  rising  from  the  ashes, 
and  there  were  many  cellars  and  chimneys  without  houses, 
showing  that  its  destruction  by  the  British  had  been  com- 
plete. My  feet  had  become  blistered,  and  I was  sore  in 
every  joint  and  muscle;  and  I suffered  intensely.  I crossed 
the  then  Indian  reservation  to  Aurora,  and  recollect  a long 
rotten  causeway  of  logs  extending  across  the  low  ground 
from  Seneca  Street  nearly  to  the  creek,  over  which  I paddled 
myself  in  a canoe.  I staid  all  night  at  a kind  of  Indian 
tavern  about  six  miles  from  Buffalo,  kept  by  a man  by  the 
name  of  Lane.  A number  of  drunken  Indians  and  white 
men  kept  up  a row  during  most  of  the  night.  Next  day  I 
went  through  the  woods  alone  to  what  is  now  Willink,  and 
thence  into  the  town  of  Wales;  where  a couple  of  weeks  of 


i 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH. 


11 


rest  healed  my  blistered  feet  and  restored  my  suffering 
muscles.  I then  traveled  back  through  Geneseo,  with  great 
ease,  making,  one  day,  forty  miles.  Then,  for  the  first  time, 
I saw  the  rich  bottom-lands  of  the  Genesee  river,  and  the 
beautiful  village  of  Canandaigua,  which  seemed  to  me  an 
earthly  paradise. 

I returned  to  my  apprenticeship  in  June,  and  improved 
every  leisure  moment  in  studying  and  reading.  My  attempt 
to  teach  had  made  me  conscious  of  my  deficiency.  I,  there- 
fore, decided  to  attend  school,  if  possible,  the  next  winter. 
But  the  best  school  was  in  a different  part  of  the  town  from 
that  in  which  my  father  lived,  and  I had  no  means  to  pay 
my  board.  Nevertheless,  I was  determined  to  go  to  school, 
and  I effected  an  arrangement  with  a farmer,  by  which  he 
was  to  board  me,  and  when  the  school  closed  I was  to  work 
for  him,  chopping  two  days  for  every  week’s  board,  which 
I did.  I then,  for  the  first  time  in  my  life,  heard  a sentence 
parsed,  and  had  an  opportunity  to  study  geography  with  a 
map.  I pursued  much  of  my  study  with,  and  perhaps  was 
unconsciously  stimulated  by  the  companionship  of,  a young 
lady  whom  I afterward  married. 

About  this  time  my  father  sold  his  farm,  and  removed  to 
Montville,  Cayuga  County,  where  Judge  Walter  Wood  re- 
sided. He  was  a gentleman  somewhat  advanced  in  years, 
and  reputed  to  be  very  wealthy.  He  had  farms  and  tenants 
scattered  over  several  counties  on  the  Old  Military  Tract. 
The  titles  were  often  the  subject  of  litigation,  and  his  pro- 
fessional business  was  mostly  limited  to  actions  of  eject- 
ment. He  had  a good  library,  and  was  a man  of  remarkable 
energy  and  of  methodical  business  habits ; and  from  his 
example  and  training  I derived  essential  benefit,  especially 
from  his  scrupulous  punctuality.  He  was  in  religious  senti- 
ments a Quaker ; using  the  Quakers’  plain  language,  dress- 
ing in  their  style,  and  punctually  attending  the  “Meeting” 
twice  a week,  and  his  office  the  other  days  of  the  week  from 
sunrise  till  nine  o’clock  in  the  evening. 

Some  persons,  without  my  knowledge,  had  suggested  to 
my  father  that  it  was  possible  for  me  to  be  something  more 


12 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH. 


than  a carder  of  wool  and  dresser  of  cloth;  and  he  was 
induced  to  apply  to  Judge  Wood  to  know  if  he  would  receive 
me  into  his  office  on  trial,  for  a little  time,  before  I went 
back  to  my  apprenticeship,  and  he  consented.  I knew  noth- 
ing of  this,  until,  at  the  dinner  table,  my  mother  informed 
me  of  it ; and  the  news  was  so  sudden  and  unexpected  that, 
in  spite  of  myself,  I burst  out  crying,  and  had  to  leave  the 
table,  much  mortified  at  my  weakness.  Suffice  it  to  say,  I 
went  immediately  into  Judge  Wood’s  office,  and  he  handed 
me  the  first  volume  of  Blackstone’s  Commentaries,  and  said, 
“Thee  will  please  to  turn  thy  attention  to  this.”  I com- 
menced reading,  but  without  understanding  much  that  I 
read.  I soon,  however,  discovered,  that  I was  reading  the 
laws  of  England,  and  not  of  the  State  of  New  York.  Not 
having  been  told  that  the  laws  of  New  York  were  founded 
upon  the  English  law,  I felt  sadly  disappointed,  as  my  study 
seemed  a waste  of  time.  I,  however,  continued  to  read,  as 
directed;  but  received  no  instruction  or  explanation  from 
Judge  Wood.  I was  occasionally  sent  out  to  attend  to  some 
business  in  the  country,  among  the  Judge’s  numerous  ten- 
ants; and  so  far  as  I know  I discharged  the  duty  satisfac- 
torily. 

When  I was  about  to  leave  the  office  and  return  to  my 
apprenticeship,  the  Judge  said  to  me,  “If  thee  has  an  ambi- 
tion for  distinction,  and  can  sacrifice  everything  else  to 
success,  the  law  is  the  road  that  leads  to  honors ; and  if 
thee  can  get  rid  of  thy  engagement  to  serve  as  an  appren- 
tice, I would  advise  thee  to  come  back  again  and  study 
law.”  But  I said,  “I  have  no  means  of  paying  my  way 
during  the  long  clerkship  of  seven  years  that  I must  serve, 
before  I can  be  admitted  to  practice.”  He  said,  “I  can  give 
thee  some  employment  in  attending  to  my  business  in  the 
country ; and,  if  necessary,  I will  advance  thee  some  money 
and  thee  can  repay  it  when  thee  gets  into  practice.”  All  this 
seemed  very  generous  and  kind;  but  how  was  I to  get 
released  from  my  engagement  to  serve  as  an  apprentice? 
To  serve  out  my  time,  was  to  waste  a precious  year  and  a 
half  in  learning  a trade  that  I never  intended  to  follow,  and 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH . 


13 


to  lose  so  much  precious  time  for  the  study  of  the  law.  I 
had  not  the  money  to  buy  my  time,  nor  any  friend  from 
whom  I could  borrow  it.  True,  I was  not  bound  by  any 
legal  indenture,  but  I had  given  my  word,  and  that  in  my 
estimation  was  equal  to  my  bond.  So  I saw  no  way  in  which 
my  rising  ambition  could  be  gratified;  and  I returned, 
rather  dejected,  to  my  apprenticeship.  In  the  mean  time, 
one  of  my  employers,  Mr.  Cheney,  had  quit  the  business 
and  gone  to  farming.  During  the  summer  and  autumn  I 
sounded  Mr.  Kellogg  on  the  subject  of  purchasing  my  time ; 
and,  finally,  he  consented  to  give  up  my  last  year,  if  I would 
relinquish  any  claim  I might  have  for  the  increased  com- 
pensation which  I was  to  receive  for  that  year,  and  pay  him 
thirty  dollars.  I agreed  to  this,  most  willingly,  and  was  to 
pay  him  as  soon  as  I could  earn  it.  I was  then  in  my 
twentieth  year,  and  immediately  took  a school  for  the  winter, 
borrowing  one  or  two  law  books  from  Judge  Wood,  to  read 
mornings  and  evenings.  When  my  school  closed,  I went 
into  his  office  again,  and  continued  my  studies  until  the  next 
winter,  when  I took  the  same  school,  and  at  its  close,  re- 
turned to  my  law  studies.  During  the  summer  of  1821,  the 
Fourth  of  July  was  celebrated  in  the  village  of  Montville, 
where  I was  living,  and  by  request  I delivered  a short  ad- 
dress. I am  sure  it  had  no  merit,  but  it  gave  me  a little 
notoriety  in  the  vicinity,  and  a gentleman  having  a suit 
before  a justice  of  the  peace  in  the  adjoining  town,  came 
and  offered  me  three  dollars  to  go  and  pettifog  for  him.  I 
got  leave  of  absence,  and  went;  but,  fortunately  for  my 
untried  powers,  the  suit  was  settled,  and  I got  my  first  fee 
without  exposing  my  ignorance. 

Judge  Wood,  however,  soon  got  wind  of  it,  and  enquired 
of  me  about  it ; and  I frankly  told  him  the  whole  truth.  He 
said  he  did  not  approve  of  my  attending  causes  before 
justices  of  the  peace.  He  instanced  several  cases  of  the 
injurious  effect  of  this,  and  among  others  that  of  Elisha 
Williams,  “who,”  he  said,  “would  have  been  an  able  advo- 
cate were  it  not  for  the  slang  he  acquired  in  attending  causes 
before  justices  of  the  peace.” 


14 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH. 


I pleaded  my  poverty,  and  the  necessity  I was  under  of 
earning  a little  something  when  such  opportunities  presented. 
But  he  was  inexorable,  and  said  I must  promise  not  to  do  it 
again  or  we  must  separate.  I became  suspicious,  and  per- 
haps unjustly,  that  he  was  more  anxious  to  keep  me  in  a 
state  of  dependence,  and  use  me  as  a drudge  in  his  business 
by  looking  after  his  tenants,  than  to  make  a lawyer  of  me. 
But  I was  resolved  to  be  a lawyer  and  nothing  else.  I, 
therefore,  after  expressing  my  gratitude  for  his  favors  and 
my  regret  at  leaving,  for  it  seemed  to  dash  all  my  hopes,  told 
him  with  great  emotion  that  I would  go.  We  settled,  and  I 
owed  him  sixty-five  dollars,  for  which  I gave  him  my  note, 
afterward  paying  it  with  interest ; and  this  is  the  only  aid  I 
ever  received  in  obtaining  my  profession. 

My  father  had  then  become  a resident  of  Aurora,  in  the 
County  of  Erie;  and  with  four  dollars  in  my  pocket — three 
dollars  of  which  was  my  fee  aforesaid — I started  for  his 
house,  and  arrived  there  the  last  of  August  or  first  of  Sep- 
tember, 1821 ; hoping,  like  Micawber,  that  something  would 
“turn  up.”  Nevertheless,  I was  very  much  discouraged.  It 
so  happened  that  a relative  of  mine  had  a suit  pending  be- 
fore a justice  of  the  peace,  which  was  to  be  tried  in  a few 
days  after  my  arrival,  and  he  requested  me  to  attend  to  it, 
which  I did,  and  succeeded.  This  brought  me  somewhat 
into  notice  in  that  vicinity,  and  I had  several  other  cases 
during  the  winter.  As  the  rules  of  the  Court  then  stood,  it 
required  seven  years’  study  in  an  attorney’s  office  before  I 
could  be  admitted  to  practice,  and  I was  therefore  desirous 
of  getting  into  some  such  office;  but  no  opportunity  pre- 
senting, I took  a school  at  East  Aurora  for  the  winter,  and 
managed  to  attend  several  suits  before  justices  on  Satur- 
days, without  neglecting  my  duties  as  teacher.  In  the  spring 
of  1822,  I came  to  Buffalo,  where  I was  an  entire  stranger, 
and  took  a district  school.  This  I did  to  enable  me  to  pay 
my  way,  as  nothing  was  then  allowed  to  clerks  for  their 
services  in  lawyers’  offices.  I soon  entered  as  a clerk  in  the 
office  of  Asa  Rice  and  Joseph  Clary  in  this  city.  I continued 
to  teach  and  study  until  the  spring  of  1823,  when  the  Court 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  YOUTH. 


15 


of  Common  Pleas  (as  a matter  of  grace),  at  the  solicitation 
of  some  of  the  older  members  of  the  Bar,  whose  acquaint- 
ance I had  made,  admitted  me  to  practice.  But,  not  having 
sufficient  confidence  in  myself  to  enter  into  competition  with 
the  older  members  of  the  Bar  here,  I opened  an  office  at 
East  Aurora,  where  I practised  till  May,  1830;  when  I 
formed  a partnership  with  Joseph  Clary  and  removed  to 
Buffalo,  which  has  ever  since  been  my  place  of  residence. 

I was  first  elected  to  the  Assembly  in  the  fall  of  1828; 
and  the  rest  of  my  public  life  is  a matter  of  public  record  and 
need  not  be  noticed  here. 

I was  admitted  as  an  attorney  of  the  Supreme  Court,  in 
1827,  and  as  counselor  in  1829;  and  continued  my  practice 
up  to  January  1,  1848,  when  I relinquished  my  profession, 
and  entered  upon  my  duties  as  Comptroller  of  the  State  of 
New  York. 

I was  married  to  Miss  Abigail  Powers,  daughter  of  the 
Rev.  Lemuel  Powers  and  Abigail  Newland,  at  Moravia, 
Cayuga  County,  on  the  fifth  day  of  February,  1826;  and 
she  died  at  Washington,  March  30,  1853. 

I was  married  again  to  Mrs.  Caroline  C.  McIntosh, 
daughter  of  Charles  Carmichael  and  Tempe  W.  Blachly,  of 
Morristown,  New  Jersey,  at  Albany,  February  10,  1858. 


ABIGAIL  POWERS  FILLMORE. 

Died  March  30,  1853. 


GENEALOGICAL  DATA  RELATING  TO 


MILLARD  FILLMORE’S  ANCESTRY 


In  1852,  replying  to  an  inquiry  regarding  his  ancestry,  Millard 
Fillmore  wrote:  “Little  I believe  is  known  of  the  genealogy  of  the 
Fillmores,  as  the  family  has  been  quite  too  obscure  to  make  it  an 
object  to  trace  its  pedigree.  I know  nothing  beyond  my  great- 
grandfather, John  Fillmore,  who  was  a native  of  Ipswich,  Mass. 
It  is  not  improbable,  that  the  name  in  English  was  spelt  Phillemore, 
or  possibly  Filmer,  but  I have  never  thought  it  worth  the  trouble 
of  an  investigation.” 

In  1857,  Dr.  Ashbel  Woodward  of  Franklin,  Conn.,  contributed 
to  the  New  England  Historical  and  Genealogical  Register  a “Memoir 
of  Captain  John  Fillmore,  with  a Genealogy  of  the  Fillmore  Family.” 
Although  compiled  fifty  years  ago,  this  is,  so  far  as  known,  the 
fullest  genealogical  survey  of  the  family  that  has  been  made,  and 
is  here  drawn  on  for  such  data  as  appear  essential  to  our  purpose. 

The  name  is  of  English  origin,  and  at  different  periods  has  been 
variously  written,  viz.,  “Filmer,”  “Filmore,”  “Fillamore,”  “Phill- 
more”  and  “Fillmore.” 

The  home  of  the  Filmer  family  appears  to  have  been  East  Sutton, 
Kent,  England.  The  family  more  originally  were  from  Herst,  Par- 
ish Otterden,  where  Robert  Filmer  resided  in  time  of  Edward  II., 
till  a descendant,  Robert,  son  of  James  Filmer,  Prothonotary  of 
Court  of  Common  Pleas,  in  time  of  Elizabeth,  had  arms  confirmed 
to  him  in  1570,  viz.,  sable,  three  bars,  three  cinque  foils  in  chief,  or; 
died,  1585 : and  had  issue  Sir  Edward,  of  Little  Charlton,  who  pur- 
chased East  Sutton.  He  married  Elizabeth,  second  daughter  of 
Richard  Argali,  by  Mary  his  wife,  and  grand-daughter  of  Thomas 
Argali,  who  died  in  the  sixth  year  of  Edward  VI.,  heir  of  Sutton. 

The  first  of  the  name  whom  we  find  in  this  country,  was  John 
Fillmore,  or  Phillmore,  “mariner,”  of  Ipswich,  Mass.,  who  pur- 
chased an  estate  in  Beverly,  Nov.  24,  1704,  and  who  was,  probably, 


17 


18 


FILLMORE  GENEALOGY. 


the  common  ancestor  of  all  of  that  name  in  America.  He  married, 
June  19,  1701,  Abigail,  daughter  of  Abraham  and  Deliverance  Tilton 
of  Ipswich,  by  whom  he  had  two  sons  and  a daughter. 

The  father,  while  on  a voyage  homeward  bound,  was  taken  by 
a French  frigate,  and  carried  a prisoner  into  Martinique,  where  he 
suffered  incredible  hardships,  and,  although  ultimately  redeemed, 
was  supposed  to  have  been  poisoned,  with  many  others,  by  the 
French,  during  his  passage  home.  He  died  before  1711,  when  hi9 
wife,  Abigail,  is  called  widow. 

The  elder  of  the  two  sons,  John,  born  March  18,  1702,  was  early 
placed  by  his  mother  as  apprentice  to  a ship  carpenter  in  Boston. 
Like  most  New  England  boys  for  many  generations — at  least,  like 
most  of  those  born  within  smell  of  salt  water — his  one  ambition 
was  to  go  to  sea;  but  it  was  not  until  he  was  nearly  twenty-one 
years  of  age  that  his  desire  was  gratified,  by  shipping  in  the  sloop 
Dolphin,  Captain  Mark  Haskell  of  Cape  Ann,  for  a fishing  voyage. 
What  therefore  befell  him  is  so  remarkable  that  it  is  worth  while 
to  print  John  Fillmore’s  own  narrative  of  it,  especially  as  that 
narrative  is  one  of  the  curious  early  publications  of  Western  New 
York.  It  appears  to  have  been  printed,  perhaps  in  Bennington,  Vt., 
as  early  as  1804;  but  the  earliest  form  in  which  it  is  known  to  the 
present  editor  is  a pamphlet  published  in  1837  at  Aurora,  Erie  Co., 
New  York,  by  A.  M.  Clapp,  later  a prominent  printer  and  pub- 
lisher of  Buffalo.  In  1837  this  John  Fillmore’s  grandson,  Millard, 
had  removed  from  Aurora  (now  East  Aurora)  to  Buffalo;  but  this 
publication  of  his  grandfather’s  adventures  was  of  a certainty  known 
to  him.  The  “Narrative”  is  reprinted  in  following  pages  of  this 
volume  from  a copy  which  was  in  Millard  Fillmore’s  possession 
for  more  than  thirty  years. 

Finally  free  from  his  pirate  companions,  Captain  John  Fillmore, 
on  Nov.  28,  1724,  married  Mary  Spiller  of  his  native  town,  Ipswich; 
and  having  disposed  of  the  paternal  home  in  Beverly,  removed  to 
Norwich,  now  Franklin,  Conn.,  where  he  had  already  made  a pur- 
chase of  real  estate.  His  first  deed,  from  Samual  Griswold,  Jr.,  con- 
veying some  seventy  acres  on  Plain  Hill  in  Norwich,  bears  date 
Nov.  9,  1724,  in  the  eleventh  year  of  his  Majesty’s  reign,  George 
the  First.  The  consideration  was  £103,  current  money. 

Here  he  resided  for  many  years.  About  1734  he  married  a second 
wife,  Dorcas  Day  of  Pomfret,  who  died  March  16,  1759;  a third 
wife,  Widow  Mary  Roach,  survived  him.  In  May,  1750,  he  was  com- 
missioned captain  of  the  7th  Military  Company  in  Norwich.  His 
standing  in  the  community  is  further  testified  to  by  the  fact  that 


FILLMORE  GENEALOGY. 


19 


on  July  29,  1729,  he  joined  the  church  under  the  pastoral  care  of 
the  Rev.  Henry  Willes,  predecessor  of  the  distinguished  Dr.  Samuel 
Nott. 

Captain  John  Fillmore  died  Feb.  22,  1777,  and  was  buried  in  the 
ancient  cemetery  at  Franklin.  In  his  will,  dated  Sept.  19,  1774,  he 
mentions  wife  Mary  and  fourteen  surviving  children.  Most  of  the 
articles  given  to  him  by  the  court  of  admiralty,  as  the  property  of 
the  pirate  captain,  Phillips,  were  bequeathed  to  his  children;  his 
sword,  which  had  served  him  in  the  French  war  and  the  Revolu- 
tion, passed  to  his  son  Nathaniel,  the  father  of  Millard. 

The  following  genealogy  presents  the  line  of  descent  from  the 
first  John  Fillmore  whose  name  is  found  on  the  records  in  this 
country,  to  the  generation  of  Millard. 

GENEALOGY  OF  THE  AMERICAN  FILLMORES , TO  1857. 

(1)  John1  Fillmore,  (2)  “mariner,”  m.  June  19,  1701,  Abigail, 
dau.  of  Abraham  and  Deliverance  Tilton,  of  Ipswich,  Mass.,  where 
he  purchased  an  estate.  He  died  on  his  homeward  passage  from  Mar- 
tinique, before  1711.  His  widow  m.  2d,  Nov.  7,  1717,  Robert  Bell, 
and  about  1720  removed  to  Norwich,  Conn.,  having  there  purchased 
a tract  of  forty  acres  of  land  of  John  Elderkin,  Jun.  Both  died  the 
same  year,  he  on  the  23d  of  August,  and  his  wife  on  the  13th  of 
Nov.,  1727. 

John1  Fillmore  (1)  and  Abigail  had: 

(2)  I.  John,2  (5)  (whose  Memoir  is  given  in  following  pages) 

was  b.  in  Ipswich,  March  18,  1702,  and  m.  1st,  Nov. 
28,  1724,  Mary  Spiller,  also  of  Ipswich;  m.  2d,  about 
1734,  Dorcas  Day,  of  Pomfret,  Conn.,  who  died  March 
16,  1759;  and  m.  3d,  Wid.  Mary  Roach,  who  sur- 
vived him.  He  d.  in  Norwich  (now  Franklin),  Feb. 
22,  1777. 

(3)  II.  Ebenezer,2  (21)  was  b.  in  Beverly  and  baptized  in  Wen- 

ham,  July  21,  1706;  m.  Feb.  15,  1732-3,  Thankful  Car- 
rier, in  Norwich,  Conn. 

(4)  III.  Abigail,2  was  b.  in  Beverly,  and  bap.  in  Wenham,  Aug. 

1,  1708;  died  young. 

John2  (2)  and  Mary  had  children  b.  in  Norwich: 

(5)  I.  John,3  b.  ; united  with  the  2d  church  in  Nor- 

wich (now  Franklin),  April  18,  1742;  m.  Leah , 

in  Norwich,  and  settled  in  Nova  Scotia. 


20 


FILLMORE  GENEALOGY . 


(6)  II. 

(7)  HI. 

Abigail,3  b.  March  28th;  m.  Nathaniel  Kimball,  Jun. 
Mary,3  b.  Aug.  17,  1731,  and  m.  John  Taylor  and  resided 
in  Norwich  (now  Franklin). 

(8)  IV. 

Henry,3  b.  June  28th,  and  bap.  Dec.  2,  1733;  m.  April  i, 
1756,  Thankful  Downer,  in  Norwich.  About  1760, 
he  resided  in  Ashford,  Conn.,  but  subsequently  emi- 
grated to  the  State  of  New  York. 

(9)  V. 

Next  follow  children  by  wife  Dorcas: 

Dorcas,3  b.  Feb.  13,  1735-6,  and  bap.  April  11,  1736;  m. 
Abel  Page,  blacksmith,  and  resided  in  Haverhill, 
Mass.  She  inherited  the  gold  rings  which  were  worn 
by  Capt.  Phillips,  the  pirate. 

(10)  VI. 

Jemimiah,3  b.  April  1st,  and  bap.  May  8,  1737;  d.  Dec. 

(n)  VII. 

1,  1741. 

Miriam,3  b.  Nov.  22,  1738,  and  bap.  Jan.  14,  1739;  m. 
Nathan  Colgrove,  and  settled  in  Middletown,  Vt. 

(12)  VIII.  Nathaniel,3  (30)  b.  March  20th,  and  bap.  March  23, 


(13)  ix. 

1739,  ’40;  m.  Oct.  20,  1767,  Hepzibah  Wood,  who  was 
b.  April  14,  1747.  He  settled  early  in  Bennington,  Vt., 
then  called  the  Hampshire  Grant,  where  he  resided  till 
his  death  in  1814.  He  served  in  the  French  war,  and 
on  being  wounded  and  left  in  the  woods  subsisted  for 
near  a week  on  a few  kernels  of  corn  and  upon  his 
shoes  and  a part  of  his  blanket  which  it  is  said  he 
roasted  and  ate.  He  was  finally  discovered  and  as- 
sisted by  his  party.  He  also  served  in  the  war  of  the 
Revolution,  and  distinguished  himself  as  a Lieutenant 
under  Stark  in  the  battle  of  Bennington. 

Comfort,3  (36)  b.  January  25th,  and  bap.  March  14, 
1742;  m.  June  22,  1763,  Zerviah  Bosworth,  who  was 
b.  Feb.  26,  1748.  He  resided  in  Norwich  (now 
Franklin),  where  he  died  Jan.  24,  1814;  by  occupa- 
tion a farmer. 

(14)  x. 

Amaziah,3  b.  Nov.  23,  1743.  He  joined  the  expedition 
against  Cuba  in  1762,  and  was  present  at  the  reduc- 
tion of  Havana,  where  he  died  shortly  after  of  fever. 

(15)  XI.  Mimee,3  b.  Jan.  3,  1745-6,  and  m.  Nathan  Dillings. 

(16)  XII.  Lydia,3  b.  Nov.  15,  1747,  and  m.  Jacob  Pember,  and 

resided  in  Norwich  (now  Franklin). 

(17)  XIII.  Luther,3  (50)  b.  Jan.  14,  1749,  ’50,  and  m.  about  1770, 

Eunice . He  emigrated  early  to  Middletown, 


FILLMORE  GENEALOGY. 


21 


Vt.,  where  he  continued  to  reside  till  the  time  of  his 
death  in  February,  1809;  a farmer. 

(18)  XIV.  Calvin,3  b.  Feb.  24,  1752,  and  d.  March  14,  1753. 

(19)  XV.  Deborah,3  b.  June  21,  1755. 

(20)  XVI.  Deliverance,3  b.  Jan.  2,  1757. 

Ebenezer3  (3)  and  Thankful  had  children  b.  in  Norwich: 

(21)  I.  Hannah,3  b.  Nov.  14,  1733. 


(22)  II. 

(23)  III. 

(24)  IV. 

(25)  V. 

Thankful,3  b.  Nov.  22,  1736. 

Ebenezer,3  b.  August  5th,  and  bap.  Sept.  21,  1740. 
Richard,3  b.  July  28,  1742. 

Benjamin,3  b.  Jan.  25,  1744. 

John, 3 (5)  and  Leah  had  children  b.  in  Norwich: 
(26)  I.  Margaret,4  b.  May  16,  1748,  and  d.  April  26,  1753. 


(27)  II. 

(28)  III. 

(29)  iv. 

Abigail,4  b.  April  21,  1750. 

Spiller,4  b.  Feb.  6,  1752,  and  d.  April  27,  1753. 
2d  Spiller,4  b.  March  6,  1754. 

(30)  I. 

Nathaniel3  (12)  and  Hepzibah  had: 

Simeon,4  (59)  b.  in  Bennington,  Dec.  13,  1768,  and  m. 
1st,  Susanna  Glezen,  who  d.  Dec.  31,  1825;  m.  2d, 
March  18,  1828,  Wid.  Lucy  Pelton.  Early  in  1790,  he 
removed  to  Paris  (now  Kirkland),  N.  Y.,  at  which 
time  Fort  Schuyler  (now  Utica),  contained  but  two 
families.  In  1811,  he  removed  to  Clarence,  Erie  Co., 
where  he  d.  April  30,  1848.  Early  in  life  he  spent  sev- 
eral years  in  teaching,  and  afterwards  acted  as  Town 
Clerk,  Supervisor,  Justice  of  the  Peace,  etc. 

(3i)  II. 

Nathaniel,4  (64)  was  b.  in  Bennington,  April  19,  1771, 
and  m.  1st,  Phoebe,  dau.  of  Doc.  Abiathar  Millard,  also 
of  B.,  who  d.  May  2,  1831 ; m.  2d,  May,  1834,  Wid. 
Eunice  Love,  with  whom  he  still  lives.  He  is  by  occu- 
pation a farmer  and  has  resided  successively  at  Locke, 
Sempronius  and  Aurora,  N.  Y.,  which  last  is  now  his 

(32)  HI. 

(33)  IV. 

home.  He  has  been  for  many  years  a Civil  Magis- 
trate, and  as  a citizen  has  been  much  respected. 

Philippia,4  b.  March  22,  1773. 

Calvin,4  b.  in  Bennington,  April  30,  1775,  and  m.  Dec.  12, 
1797,  Jerusha  Turner,  who  d.  in  Aurora,  Jan.  4,  1852, 
s.  p.  Is  by  occupation  a farmer,  and  resides  in  Au- 

22 

FILLMORE  GENEALOGY. 

(34)  V. 

(35)  VI. 

rora,  N.  Y.  During  the  last  war  with  England  he  had 
command  of  a company  which  was  frequently  called 
into  service  upon  the  Niagara  frontier.  On  one  occa- 
sion he  volunteered  with  a part  of  his  company  to 
cross  the  lines,  and  was  engaged  in  a picket  fight  back 
of  Fort  George,  in  which  they  were  successful  and 
took  some  prisoners.  He  was  subsequently  pro- 
moted to  a colonelcy.  Has  acted  as  Coroner,  Deputy 
Marshal,  and  in  1824,  was  a member  of  Assembly.  Is 
fond  of  books,  especially  of  the  class  of  Shakespeare 
and  Peter  Pindar.  [Died  at  East  Aurora,  Oct  22, 
1865.] 

Elijah,4  b.  in  Bennington,  April  8,  1778. 

Darius,4  b.  in  Bennington,  Sept.  28,  1781. 

Comfort 3 (13)  and  Zerviah  had  children  b.  in  Norwich: 

(36)  I.  Artimesia,4  b.  Feb.  9,  1764;  m.  September,  1782,  Isaiah 


(37)  II. 

Armstrong,  and  resided  in  Franklin. 

Amazial,4  (73)  b.  Sept.  26,  1765,  and  m.  Dec.  21,  1786, 
Hannah  Ladd.  Resided  in  Franklin,  where  he  d. 
April  5,  1847.  He  was  for  many  years  a local  preacher 
of  the  M.  E.  church. 

(38)  HI. 

Lavius,4  (82)  b.  Oct.  1,  1767,  and  m.  Sept.  8,  1791, 
Philura  Hartshorn.  Resided  in  Middlebury,  Vt. ; was 
by  occupation  a master  builder,  and  was  at  some 
periods  extensively  engaged  in  erecting  church  edi- 
fices. 

(39)  IV. 

Brunetta,4  b.  Nov.  16,  1769;  m.  Dec.  16,  1787,  Levi 
Hazen,  and  resided  in  Rome  (now  Lee),  N.  Y. 

(40)  V. 

(41)  VI. 

Earl,4  b.  Sept.  26,  1772,  and  d.  June  6,  1776. 

Septa,4  (92)  b.  Oct.  13,  1774;  m.  Dec.  21,  1797,  Eunice 
Edgerton,  and  resided  in  Chazy,  N.  Y.,  where  he  was 
the  proprietor  of  a large  hotel,  during  the  last  war 
with  England.  He  held  the  command  of  colonel  at 
Plattsburg,  and  was  not  only  actively  engaged  in 
repelling  that  assault  of  the  enemy,  but  continued  in 
the  service  to  the  end  of  the  war.  While  in  the  field 

(4 2)  VII. 

his  own  house  was  plundered  by  the  enemy,  and  his 
family  impelled  to  seek  refuge  by  flight. 

2d  Earl,4  b.  Dec.  21,  1776;  m.  February,  1799,  Betsey  D. 
McHeague.  He  resided  in  Rome  (now  Lee),  N.  Y., 
where  he  d.  Sept.  28,  1814.  He  served  as  a Captain 

FILLMORE  GENEALOGY. 


23 


in  the  early  part  of  the  war  of  1812,  his  post  of  duty 
being  at  Sackett’s  Harbor. 

(43)  VIII.  Zerviah,4  b.  Feb.  28,  1779;  m.  May  7,  1798,  Joshua  Bush- 
nell,  and  resided  in  Rome  (now  Lee),  N.  Y. 


(44)  IX. 

Adam,4  b.  March  1,  1781 ; m.  September,  1801,  Anna 
Hartshorn,  and  resided  in  Rome  (now  Lee),  N.  Y., 
by  occupation  a farmer. 

(45)  X. 

(46)  XI. 

Eunice,4  b.  Aug.  29,  1783 ; m.  Oct.  3,  1802,  Asa  Kingesley. 
Theodosia,4  b.  Nov.  21,  1785;  m.  Jan.  1,  1804,  Thomas 
Pember,  and  resided  in  Franklin,  where  she  d.  Jan. 
26,  1831. 

(47)  XII.  Harriet,4  b.  Nov.  14,  1788;  m.  John  Humiston,  and  set- 

tled in  Vienna,  N.  Y. 

(48)  XIII.  Laura,4  b.  July  1,  1790;  m.  June  31,  1811,  Walter  Gid- 

dings,  and  continued  to  reside  in  Franklin,  where  she 
d.  July  30,  1827. 

(49)  XIV.  Comfort  Day,4  (103)  b.  July  8,  1792;  m.  March  16,  1813, 

Annice  Bailey.  He  has  till  within  a few  years  resided 


(50)  I. 

(51)  H. 

upon  the  paternal  homestead  which  was  also  the  resi- 
dence of  Capt.  John2  Fillmore.  He  has  in  his  pos- 
session the  “gun”  which  was  once  the  property  of  the 
pirate  Phillips.  He  held  many  civil  offices,  having 
represented  his  native  town  several  times  in  the  State 
Legislature.  Is  also  a local  preacher  of  the  M.  E. 
church.  His  present  house  is  in  Lisbon,  Conn.  [In 
this  and  other  cases,  the  data  are  not  continued 
beyond  1857.] 

LutherS  (17)  and  Eunice  had: 

Esther,4  b.  in  Norwich,  Oct.  8,  1772. 

Ethni,4  b.  in  Middletown,  Vt. ; d.  in  , Jefferson 

Co.,  N.  Y.,  a few  years  since;  farmer;  had  one  son 
and  seven  daus. 

(52)  HI. 

Daniel,4  b.  in  Middletown,  and  now  resides  in  Highgate, 
Vt. ; farmer;  has  two  sons  and  two  daus. 

(53)  IV. 

John,4  b.  in  Middletown,  Sept.  25,  1781 ; m.  February, 
1803,  Huldah  Whitmore.  By  occupation  a blacksmith ; 
d.  Feb.  23,  1822,  leaving  seven  sons  and  three  daus. 

(54)  V. 

Amaziah,4  b.  in  Middletown;  removed  to  Jefferson  Co., 
N.  Y.,  in  1812,  where  he  d.  lately,  leaving  children. 

(55)  VI. 

Bulah,4  b.  . 

(56)  VII.  Lavinea,4  b.  — 

(57)  VIII.  Eunice,4  b.  

(58)  IX.  Deliverance,4  b. 


24 

FILLMORE  GENEALOGY. 

(59)  I. 

Simeon4  (30)  and  Susanna  had: 

Glezen,5  b.  in  Bennington,  Dec.  22,  1789;  m.  Sept.  20, 
1809,  Lovina  Atwill,  in  Whitestown,  N.  Y.  He  was 
licensed  as  a local  preacher  in  1809,  which  constituted 
him,  we  believe,  the  first  licensed  minister  of  any  de- 
nomination west  of  Genesee  River,  in  the  State  of 
New  York.  He  joined  the  Genesee  Conference  in 
1818,  and  three  years  after  was  appointed  Presiding 
Elder.  He  now  resides  in  Clarence,  and  travels  Niag- 
ara district.1 

(60)  II. 

Sherlock,5  b.  in  Paris,  N.  Y.,  Jan.  1,  1793;  m.  1st,  Jan. 
9,  1817,  Lois  Slosson,  who  d.  Feb.  21,  1844;  m.  2d, 
Orra  Hamlin.  Was  on  the  Niagara  frontier  repeat- 
edly during  the  war  of  1812,  and  served  as  a Captain. 
He  has  been  a magistrate.  Is  now  a farmer,  and 

resides  in  Clarence,  N.  Y. 

(61)  III.  Hiram,6  b.  in  Paris,  April  6,  1801 ; m.  Dec.  13,  1838, 


(62)  IV. 

Julia  A.,  wid.  of  Doct.  Webster,  and  dau.  of  Dr.  Bald- 
win, of  Onondaga  Co.,  N.  Y.  Now  resides  in  Michi- 
gan. 

Asahel  Norton,6  b.  in  Paris,  Oct.  19,  1807;  m.  1st,  April 
8,  1833,  Lydia  A.  Webster,  of  Buffalo,  who  d.  July  28, 
1836;  m.  2d,  Aug.  22,  1837,  Lovina  F.  Atwill.  In 
1830,  was  licensed  to  preach,  since  which  he  has  been 
successively  ordained  as  a deacon  and  Elder  by  Bishop 
Hedding.  In  1839  he  became  secretary  of  the  Gene- 
see Conference,  which  case  he  continued  to  fill  till  the 
Conference  was  divided  in  1848,  when  he  was  ap- 
pointed Presiding  Elder  on  the  Seneca  Lake  Dist.  iri 
East  Gen.  Conf.  Is  the  author  of  a work  on  “Church 

(63)  v. 

Polity.”  Present  res.  Waterloo,  Seneca  Co.,  N.  Y. 
Harriet,6  b.  in  Paris,  Jan.  1,  1811;  m.  April  17,  1827, 
John  Conly. 

(64)  I. 

Nathaniel 4 (31)  and  Phoebe  had: 

Olive  Armstrong,6  b.  in  Bennington,  Dec.  16,  1797;  m. 
March  7,  1816,  Henry  S.  Johnson;  farmer  at  Sempro- 

1.  The  reader  must  bear  in  mind  that  these  records  were  prepared  in 
1857.  The  Rev.  Glezen  Fillmore  died  at  Clarence,  N.  Y.,  Jan.  26,  1875.  His 
wife,  Lavina,  survived  until  Sept.  3,  1893,  passing  away  at  106  years,  the  oldest 
resident  of  Erie  County  at  the  time  of  her  death. 


MILLARD  POWERS  FILLMORE. 

Born  April  25,  1828.  Died  November  15,  1 889. 

From  an  early  daguerreotype,  probably  about  1650,  when  he  was  private  secretary 
to  his  father,  the  President. 


FILLMORE  GENEALOGY. 


25 


(65)  II. 


(66)  III. 


(67)  IV. 

(68)  V. 

(69)  VI. 


(70)  VII. 


nius ; has  had  five  sons  and  dau. ; now  resides  in  Dex- 
ter, Mich.,  a wid. 

MILLARD,5  b.  in  Locke  (now  Summer  Hill),  Jan.  7, 
1800;  m.  Feb.  5,  1826,  Abigail  Powers,  at  the  village 
of  Moravia,  where  she  then  resided.  She  d.  March 
30,  1853,  at  the  City  Hotel,  Washington,  and  was 
buried  in  Forest  Lawn  Cemetery,  in  the  City  of  Buf- 
falo. Her  genealogy  will  be  found  in  the  Leland 
Magazine , at  pages  113  and  114.  The  incidents  in  the 
life  of  President  Fillmore  are  also  correctly  narrated 
in  the  same  sketch,  and  also  in  the  fourth  vol.  of  the 
Statesman’s  Manual,  p.  1917  of  the  edition  of  1852, 
published  in  New  York,  by  Edward  Walker,  and  like- 
wise in  the  Lives  of  the  Presidents,  published  by  G. 
H.  Salisbury,  at  Brattleboro’,  Vt.,  1852.  He  has  had 
a son  and  daughter,  the  former  Millard  Powers6  was 
b.  at  Aurora,  April  25,  1828;  is  by  profession  a lawyer, 
and  acted  as  private  secretary  for  his  father  during 
his  Presidential  term.  Mary  Abigail,6  the  daughter, 
was  b.  in  Buffalo,  March  27,  1832.1 

Cyrus,5  b.  in  Locke,  Dec.  22,  1801 ; m.  May  19,  1825, 
Laura  Morey,  in  Holland,  N.  Y.  Resides  in  Green- 
field, Ind. ; a farmer;  has  had  three  sons  and  three 
daughters. 

Almon  Hopkins,5  b.  in  Sempronius  (now  Niles),  April 
13,  1806;  and  d.  at  Aurora,  Jan.  17,  1830;  a student 
at  law. 

Calvin  Turner,5  b.  in  Sempronius,  July  9,  1810;  m.  1830, 
Miranda  Waldo.  Resides  near  Ann  Arbor,  Mich.; 
by  occupation  a carpenter. 

Julia,5  b.  in  Sempronius,  Aug.  29,  1812;  m.  Oct.  27,  1840, 
A.  C.  Harris ; a lawyer  by  profession,  and  res.  at  To- 
ledo. 

Darius  Ingraham,5  b.  in  Sempronius,  Nov.  16,  1814,  and 
d.  at  Aurora,  March  9,  1837;  a student  at  law. 


1.  The  following  data  relating  to  Millard  Fillmore’s  own  family,  may 
be  added:  His  father,  Nathaniel,  died  at  East  Aurora,  N.  Y.,  March  28,  1863. 

Millard’s  daughter,  Mary  Abigail,  died  at  East  Aurora,  whither  she  had  gone 
on  a brief  visit,  July  26,  1854.  Millard  Fillmore  died  in  Buffalo,  March  8, 
1874.  His  second  wife,  Caroline  C.,  survived  until  Aug.  n,  1881;  and  his 
only  son,  Millard  Powers,  remained  a bachelor,  making  his  home  in  Buffalo, 
until  his  death,  Nov.  15,  1889. 


26 


FILLMORE  GENEALOGY . 


(71)  VIII.  Charles  DeWitt,5  b.  in  Sempronius,  Sept.  23,  1817;  m. 

Feb.  11,  1840,  Julia  Etta  Green;  is  by  occupation  a 
mason,  and  res.  at  St.  Paul,  Minn.  [Died  July  27, 

1854-] 

Phoebe  Maria,5  in  Sempronius,  Nov.  23,  1819;  d.  un- 
married at  Adrian,  Mich.,  July  2,  1843. 


(72)  IX. 


A 


NARRATIVE 


OF  THE 

SINGULAR  SUFFERINGS 


OF 

JOHN  FILLMORE 

J1JVD  OTHERS, 

ON  BOARD  THE  NOTED  PIRATE  VESSEL  COMMANDED  BY 

CAPTAIN  PHILLIPS: 

With  an  Account  of  their  daring  Enterprise . and  happy  Escape 
*he  tyranny  of  that  desperate  Crew , by 
capturing  their  VesseL 


Let  fiction  drop,  lei  scenes  like  these  be  read, 
And  virtue  shudder  while  ii  reads  wilh  dread  : 
Yet  realize  a sovereign  Power  presides, 

And  for  the  tempted  orders  and  provides — 
Restrains  the  wrath  of  man,  and  guidea  the  ways 
Of  desperate  gangs  to  issue  in  his  praise. 


AURORA : 

PRINTED  BY  Jl.  M.  CLAPP. 
1837. 


[Facsimile  of  title-page  of  John  Fillmore’s  “Narrative,”  1837.] 


27 


INTRODUCTION 


Mr.  John  Fillmore,  the  principal  subject  of  the  following  nar- 
rative, was  an  early  settler  in  Norwich,  Connecticut,  where  he  sus- 
tained the  character  of  a virtuous  and  industrious  citizen,  and  by  a 
relation  of  the  incidents  of  his  unfortunate  seafaring  excursions, 
frequently  raised  the  admiration  and  excited  the  sympathetic  feel- 
ings of  his  neighbors;  while  by  ascribing  his  deliverance  to  the  over- 
ruling hand  of  Providence,  his  solemnity  induced  praise,  and  the 
agitation  of  his  bosom  occasioned  the  feeling  tear  to  How  from  his 
own  eyes,  and  the  eyes  of  his  audience. 

Mr.  James  Cheeseman,  returned  to  England,  where  he  was  re- 
warded by  the  British  government,  and  enjoyed  until  his  death,  the 
place  of  quartermaster  in  the  King's  dock  yard  at  Portsmouth.  He 
sustained  thro ’ all  the  character  of  a serious  man,  and  like  his  fellow 
sufferer,  Fillmore,  lived  beloved,  and  died  respected. 

Bennington  (Vt.),  Sept.,  1804. 


NARRATIVE,  ETC. 


The  depravity  of  the  human  mind  is  so  universally  acknowledged 
in  the  present  enlightened  age,  and  the  belief  of  the  universal  presi- 
dency of  Providence  over  the  affairs  of  men  so  evidently  established, 
as  to  need  no  argument  to  enforce  the  reception  of  a narrative  in 
which  both  are  peculiarly  manifest. 

Convinced  of  the  truth  of  the  above  sentiment,  I shall  proceed  in 
my  narrative,  endeavoring  on  the  one  hand  to  avoid  tedious  repeti- 
tions, and  on  the  other  to  omit  no  incident  that  may  afford  enter- 
tainment to  my  courteous  reader. 

My  father  dying  when  I was  young,  my  mother  put  me  apprentice 
to  learn  the  trade  or  occupation  of  a carpenter.  On  the  other  side 
of  the  road,  opposite  to  the  house  where  I lived,  there  dwelt  a tailor, 
who  had  an  apprentice  named  William  White,  with  whom  I was 
intimate  during  the  time  of  his  apprenticeship;  but  he  was  out  of 
his  time,  and  went  to  sea  some  time  before  I was  free,  being  about 
three  years  older  than  myself. 

White  did  not  return  as  was  expected,  nor  do  I remember  that  I 
ever  saw  or  heard  of  him  afterwards  till  I found  him  among  the 
pirates. 

From  my  youth  I had  an  almost  irresistible  desire  for  undertaking 
a voyage  to  sea,  which  I resolved  at  all  events  to  gratify,  as  soon  as  I 
obtained  a right  to  dispose  of  myself.  In  establishing  this  resolu- 
tion, a love  of  novelty,  joined  to  a secret  delight  I enjoyed  in  hearing 
sailors  relate  the  curiosities  they  met  with  in  their  voyages,  doubt- 
less had  a great  effect,  and  the  older  I grew,  stronger  became  the  im- 
pression. 

But  however  strong  my  desire  was  to  follow  the  sea,  a sense  of 
duty  I owed  my  surviving  parent,  so  far  overbalanced  my  inclination, 
as  to  occasion  me  to  form  a determination  not  to  gratify  it  until  I 
should  be  of  age,  unless  I could  gain  her  consent.  The  propensity, 
however,  was  so  strong,  as  to  induce  me  at  the  age  of  seventeen,  to 
apply  to  my  mother,  and  request  her  liberty  to  go  a voyage  to  sea. 
My  mother  was  very  uneasy  at  the  request,  and  used  every  art  of 
persuasion  that  maternal  tenderness  could  dictate,  to  induce  me  to 


29 


30 


JOHN  FILLMORE’S  ADVENTURES. 


relinquish  the  design;  expressing  some  surprise  that  I should  enter- 
tain any  idea  of  following  the  sea,  as  it  was  a life  most  evidently  at- 
tended with  innumerable  fatigues  and  dangers ; urging  as  a particular 
reason  for  her  disapprobation  of  the  measure,  the  melancholy  fate  of 
my  father,  who,  being  a seafaring  man,  was  taken  by  a French 
frigate,  on  a voyage  homeward  bound,  and  carried  into  Martinico,  a 
number  of  years  before,  where  he  underwent  all  the  hardships  of  a 
close  and  cruel  confinement,  and  although  ultimately  redeemed  with 
many  others,  was  supposed  to  be  most  inhumanly  poisoned  by  the 
French,  on  board  the  cartel,  as  they  principally  died  on  their  pas- 
sage home. 

However  strong  an  argument  this  might  have  appeared  to  my 
mother,  it  failed  of  its  desired  effect  on  me;  it  only  lulled  my  desire 
for  a while,  but  by  no  means  eradicated  it.  I waited,  however,  with 
a great  degree  of  patience  about  two  years  longer,  when  I again 
asked  leave  to  go  a voyage  to  the  West  Indies,  and  my  mother  finding 
my  resolution  unabated,  concluded  she  could  as  well  part  with  me 
then  as  when  I became  of  age,  after  which  she  imagined  she  should 
not  be  able  to  detain  me.  Upon  the  whole,  she  told  me  she  was  un- 
willing I should  go  to  the  West  Indies,  but  that  the  sloop,  Dolphin, 
Capt.  Haskel,  was  then  in  the  harbor,  fitting  out  for  a fishing  voyage, 
and  if  I would  go  with  him  she  would  give  her  consent.  To  this 
proposal  I readily  assented. 

I accordingly  shipped  on  board  the  sloop,  and  had  a tolerable  pass- 
age to  the  fishing  ground;  but  soon  after  our  arrival  there,  we  were 
surprised  by  the  appearance  of  a ship  which,  from  external  signs,  we 
suspected  to  be  a pirate.  We  were  not  by  any  means  prepared  to 
oppose  so  formidable  an  enemy,  and  she  was  so  close  upon  us  before 
we  suspected  her,  as  to  render  it  impossible  for  us  to  escape  by  run- 
ning away,  we  were  therefore  obliged  to  abide  our  fate  peaceably,  let 
the  consequence  be  what  it  would. 

The  pirate  soon  came  up  and  sent  a boat  on  board  our  sloop,  de- 
manding who  we  were,  and  where  we  were  bound?  To  which  our 
Captain  gave  a direct  answer.  By  this  boat’s  crew  we  learned  that 
the  noted  pirate,  Captain  Phillips,  commanded  their  ship.  This  in- 
telligence, it  will  readily  be  conceived,  gave  us  great  uneasiness,  most 
of  our  crew  being  quite  young.  Having  often  heard  of  the  cruelties 
committed  by  that  execrable  pirate,  made  us  dread  to  fall  into  his 
hands. 

The  pirate’s  boat  soon  boarded  us  again,  demanding  the  name  of 
every  hand  on  board.  In  this  boat  came  WHITE,  the  tailor,  with 
whom  I had  been  acquainted  during  his  apprenticeship,  as  before 
mentioned.  I was  greatly  surprised  to  find  him  employed  in  so 


JOHN  FILLMORE’S  ADVENTURES. 


31 


criminal  a course  of  life,  though  I said  nothing  of  the  matter  to  him. 
On  the  return  of  the  pirate’s  boat  with  a list  of  our  names,  White,  as 
I was  afterwards  informed,  acquainted  Phillips  of  his  knowledge  of 
me,  informing  him,  that  if  he  could  engage  me  in  his  service,  he  would 
gain  a good,  stout,  resolute  fellow,  every  way,  he  supposed,  such  a 
hand  as  he  wanted. 

On  receiving  this  information,  as  he  stood  in  need  of  a hand,  and 
found  we  had  no  property  he  wanted  on  board,  he  sent  his  boat  once 
more,  with  orders  to  Capt.  Haskel,  to  send  me  on  board  his  ship,  and 
the  rest  of  his  crew,  with  the  sloop,  may  go  free.  My  worthy  com- 
mander, with  much  visible  concern  in  his  countenance,  took  me  aside, 
and  informed  me  of  Phillips’  orders,  adding,  that  although  it  would 
be  exceedingly  disagreeable  and  painful  to  him  to  let  me  go,  yet  we 
were  entirely  in  the  power  of  a bloody,  merciless  ruffian,  and  had  no 
hopes  of  escape,  but  by  giving  me  up,  I believe,  says  he,  you  must  go 
and  try  your  fortune  with  him. 

The  thought  of  being  sacrificed,  as  it  were,  to  procure  liberty  for 
the  rest  of  the  crew,  operated  greatly  upon  my  spirits,  and  the  con- 
clusion I drew  up  was,  that  I would  not,  on  any  conditions,  agree 
to  go  on  board  the  pirate.  I therefore  told  my  Captain  that  I had 
ever  been  faithful  to  his  interests  and  commands,  that  I had  always 
wished  to  do  my  duty  punctually  and  well,  but  that  I was  determined 
not  to  go  on  board  the  pirate,  let  the  consequence  be  what  it  would. 
Our  conversation  ended  here,  for  that  time,  and  the  boat  returned 
without  me. 

Phillips  was  greatly  incensed  when  the  boat  returned  without  me, 
and  sent  again,  with  orders  to  bring  me  either  dead  or  alive.  My 
Captain  took  me  aside  again,  and  told  me  the  pirate’s  resolution  and 
message,  adding,  that  he  believed  I should  do  well  to  go  with  them, 
for  if  I refused  to  go,  and  made  resistance,  it  would  be  inevitable 
death  to  me,  and  probably  to  our  whole  crew.  He  urged  further, 
that  my  submitting  would  prove  the  certain  release  of  the  rest  of  the 
crew,  and  there  would  be  at  least  a probability  of  my  making  an 
escape  from  them  at  some  time  or  other;  but  if  I could  not  find  a 
way  to  escape,  it  was  not  impossible  but  Phillips  might  discharge  me, 
for  he  had  sent  word  that  if  I would  agree  to  serve  him  faithfully 
for  two  months,  he  would  then  set  me  at  liberty. 

Those  only  who  have  been  in  similar  circumstances  can  form  any 
adequate  idea  of  the  distress  I experienced  at  this  time.  If  I ob- 
stinately refused  to  join  the  pirates,  instant  death  stared  me  and  my 
comrades  in  the  face;  if  I consented  to  go  with  them,  I expected  to 
be  massacred  for  refusing  to  sign  the  piratical  articles,  which  I had 
fully  determined  never  to  do,  though  I should  be  put  to  the  extremity 


32 


JOHN  FILLMORE’S  ADVENTURES. 


of  torture  for  refusal.  Into  so  critical  a situation  had  my  bad  for- 
tune plunged  me,  that  inevitable  destruction  seemed  to  stare  me  in 
the  face  from  every  quarter. 

I took  the  matter,  however,  into  serious  consideration,  and  after 
the  most  mature  deliberation  determined  to  venture  myself  among 
them,  rather  than  bring  the  vengeance  of  the  pirates  upon  my  com- 
rades; I therefore  went  with  them,  seemingly  content,  and  the  Cap- 
tain renewing  his  promise  to  set  me  at  liberty  in  two  months,  I en- 
gaged to  serve  him  to  the  best  of  my  abilities  during  that  term. 

I was  likewise  agreeably  disappointed  in  their  not  urging  so 
strenuously  as  I expected,  the  thing  I most  of  all  dreaded,  viz.,  the 
signing  of  the  articles.  To  induce  me  to  join  them,  they  used  more 
arguments  of  a persuasive  than  a compulsory  nature,  judging,  I sup- 
pose, that  youth  would  be  more  easily  enticed  than  compelled  to  join 
in  sharing  their  ill-gotten  gain. 

When  I first  went  on  board  the  pirate,  their  crew  consisted  of  ten 
men,  including  the  Captain ; and  the  whole  of  them  I think,  as  stout, 
daring,  hardy-looking  fellows  as  I ever  saw  together.  As  I was  then 
the  only  hand  on  board  who  had  not  subscribed  to  their  articles,  the 
Captain  assigned  me  the  helm,  where  I kept  my  station  during  the 
greatest  part  of  the  time  I stayed  with  them. 

No  captures  of  any  consequence  were  made  during  the  first  two 
months.  Some  small  vessels  were  taken,  but  their  loading  was  too 
inconsiderable  to  satisfy  the  insatiable  disposition  of  the  pirates. 

The  period  being  now  arrived,  when  I had  a right  according  to 
agreement,  to  demand  my  liberty,  I thought  it  a proper  season  at 
least  to  remind  the  Captain  of  the  manumission  he  had  engaged  me. 
For  this  purpose  I went  to  him,  and  in  language  the  least  offensive 
that  I could  frame,  reminded  him  of  his  promise  and  requested  him 
to  fulfill  it.  Phillips,  in  tolerable  good  humor,  replied,  that  we  had 
done  but  little  business  since  I came  aboard;  that  he  could  not  well 
spare  me  yet,  but  if  I would  stay  with  him  three  months  longer,  he 
would  then  set  me  at  liberty,  upon  his  honor;  and  I was  obliged 
quietly  to  comply  with  his  demands,  and  trust  to  his  honor,  though  it 
turned  out  in  the  end  that  he  did  but  mock  me. 

Nothing  of  importance  occurred  during  these  three  months.  Some 
few  small  vessels  were  taken  and  plundered;  their  cargoes  were  of 
no  great  value,  and  their  hands  were  dismissed  with  their  vessels, 
except  two  or  three  robust,  stout  looking  men,  whom  Phillips  picked 
from  among  them,  and  compelled  to  sign  his  articles. 

When  the  three  months  were  expired,  I went  to  the  Captain,  and 
once  more  reminded  him  of  the  expiration  of  my  servitude,  and  hand- 
somely requested  him  to  set  me  ashore,  according  to  his  promise,  that 


JOHN  FILLMORE’S  ADVENTURES. 


33 


I might  go  to  my  mother,  who  had  not  heard  from  me  since  my  first 
Captain  returned  from  his  fishing  voyage. 

“Set  you  at  liberty!  damn  you;  you  shall  be  set  at  liberty  when 
I’m  damned,  and  not  before,”  replied  Phillips,  in  a rage  more  com- 
patible with  the  diabolical  disposition  of  an  infernal  fiend,  than  a 
being  endowed  with  a rational  soul,  susceptible  of  human  sensations. 

It  is  evident,  and  experience  daily  evinces,  that  persons  by  habitu- 
ating themselves  to  any  particular  vice,  become  so  familiarized 
thereto,  as  to  be  unable  to  distinguish  it  from  a real  virtue;  and  in 
such  case,  conscience  ceases  to  alarm  the  understanding,  and  suffers 
the  culprit  to  pursue  it  to  its  extremity.  This  was  undoubtedly  the 
case  with  Captain  Phillips,  who  was  not  addicted  to  one  particular 
vice,  but  to  every  vice. 

Having  now  lost  all  hope  and  probability  of  being  liberated,  there 
was  no  alternative  more  eligible  for  me  than  to  sustain  my  servitude 
with  as  much  patience,  resolution,  and  fortitude  as  possible. 
Although  the  Captain  had  asserted  that  I should  not  be  set  at  liberty 
till  he  was  damned,  I was  still  in  hopes  that  we  might  be  taken  by 
some  vessel,  or  that  we  might  take  more  prisoners,  who,  in  concert 
with  myself,  might  be  able  to  contrive  some  plan  whereby  we  might 
take  the  ship,  and  thereby  incapacitate  Phillips  to  determine  whether 
I should  obtain  my  freedom  before  he  received  his  final  doom  or  not. 

As  we  were  sailing  one  day,  we  came  within  view  of  a fine 
merchant  vessel,  the  appearance  of  which  pleased  the  Captain  much, 
who  swore  by  Heaven  he  would  have  it.  I was  ordered  to  bear  off 
for  her  as  direct  as  possible.  Phillips,  being  extremely  anxious  for 
taking  this  vessel,  walked  the  deck  with  his  glass  in  his  hand,  view- 
ing her  the  greatest  part  of  the  day,  and  damning  me  because,  as  he 
said,  I did  not  steer  so  well  as  I might. 

Eleven  holes  he  cut  through  my  hat  and  the  skin  of  my  head, 
without  the  least  provocation,  with  his  broad  sword.  But  the 
merchantman  being  light  built,  and  completely  rigged,  left  sight  of  us 
before  night.  Phillips  exclaimed  in  a horrid  rage,  that  the  loss  of 
that  fine  ship  was  all  my  damn’d  doings ; adding,  that  he  wanted  the 
damn’d  thing  just  long  enough  to  sail  to  hell  in. 

We  had  several  prisoners  on  board,  Frenchmen  and  negroes;  we 
had  also  an  American,  with  whom  I had  been  intimately  acquainted 
when  young,  and  whom  the  pirates  could  not  persuade  or  compel  to 
sign  their  articles.  Thus  fortune  had  sent  me  one  friend  with  whom 
I could  sympathize  under  my  almost  insupportable  calamities ; though 
our  sympathy  was  chiefly  confined  to  looks  and  private  gestures,  for 
we  durst  not  complain  in  the  hearing  of  the  crew. 


34 


JOHN  FILLMORE’S  ADVENTURES. 


About  the  end  of  the  seventh  month  from  my  entering  on  board, 
we  took  a merchantman  belonging  to  Boston,  Captain  Harridon 
commander,  a young  man  about  twenty-two  years  of  age.  The 
father  of  this  young  man  was  a merchant  in  Boston,  and  had  given 
his  son  the  education  requisite  for  a mariner,  and  sent  him  to  the 
West  Indies,  Captain  of  this  vessel,  in  which  he  was  returning  home 
when  we  took  him. 

All  except  Harridon,  James  Cheeseman,  a ship  carpenter,  and  a 
Spanish  Indian,  who  was  taken  with  Harridon,  the  friend  alluded  to 
above,  and  myself,  had  been  compelled  to  sign  the  pirate’s  articles. 
We  had  been  enjoined  to  sign  them,  but  had  utterly  refused,  choosing 
rather  to  be  killed  by  the  villains  than  to  be  taken,  condemned  and 
executed,  for  being  their  associates.  But  I suppose  they  thought  we 
might  be  serviceable  to  them,  and  therefore  deemed  it  best  not  to 
dispatch  us  yet. 

One  day  we  took  a large  vessel  after  considerable  trouble  in 
chasing,  but  found  nothing  on  board  worthy  the  attention  of  the 
pirates,  except  their  provisions  and  water,  which  being  in  some  want 
of,  Phillips  stript  of  it  entirely,  took  out  one  or  two  of  their  hands, 
and  let  them  go. 

Some  of  the  pirates  having  been  sent  on  board  of  Harridon’s 
vessel,  there  remained  only  six  of  the  old  pirates  on  board,  besides 
those  who  had  been  forced  to  sign  their  articles;  and  as  there  were 
five  of  us  who  wished  to  escape  from  them,  we  began  to  think  and 
even  suggest  trying  some  scheme  to  effect  that  purpose.  There  was 
no  time  that  we  could  confer  together  without  being  discovered,  ex- 
cept in  the  dead  of  night,  and  even  then  we  durst  not  be  all  together, 
and  consequently  could  not,  without  great  difficulty  succeed  in  form- 
ing any  regular  plan  to  effect  our  escape. 

One  day  we  came  in  sight  of  a merchantman  which  Phillips 
imagining  would  prove  a valuable  prize,  gave  orders  for  chasing. 
His  orders  were  put  into  execution  immediately,  but  the  merchant- 
man being  light  built,  and  a prime  sailor,  we  chased  her  three  days 
before  we  were  able  to  capture  her.  Having  made  what  disposition 
he  pleased  of  the  hands,  &c.,  he  found  on  board  the  new  prize, 
Phillips  ordered  one  Fern,  a daring,  resolute  fellow  of  the  old  pirate 
crew,  to  go  on  board  of  her,  and  take  command,  taking  some  of  the 
old  crew  along  with  him. 

Phillips  had  now  become  so  extremely  arbitrary  as  to  be  hated  by 
his  own  crew,  but  they  stood  in  such  dread  of  him  that  they  durst 
no  more  contradict  his  orders  than  they  durst  to  die.  Soon  after 
night  came  on,  Fern  proposed  to  the  pirates  with  him,  that  as  they 
were  now  in  possession  of  a fine  vessel,  every  way  fitted  for  a 


JOHN  FILLMORE’S  ADVENTURES. 


35 


cruizer,  and  as  good  sailor  as  Phillips’,  if  they  would  join  him,  he 
would  put  out  his  lights  and  steering  by  the  light  of  the  old  pirate, 
make  their  escape  from  the  tyranny  of  Phillips,  and  set  up  for  them- 
selves. The  crew  accordingly  joined,  and  they  began  to  execute 
their  plan,  but  Phillips  suspecting  their  design,  on  finding  they  dark- 
ened their  ship,  put  out  his  own  light,  and  endeavored  to  follow 
them ; in  which  design  he  succeeded  so  well  as  to  be  in  sight  of  them 
the  next  morning.  We  continued  to  chase  the  new  pirate  till  the 
third  day,  before  we  came  up  with  her,  when  a fierce  engagement 
ensued;  but  Fern  soon  finding  himself  overpowered,  and  no  hope  of 
escape,  sent  word  to  Phillips,  that  if  he  would  grant  him  pardon,  he 
would  strike  to  him,  and  once  more  serve  him  faithfully ; but  if  not, 
they  would  all  fight  till  they  died.  Phillips  immediately  complied 
with  their  demand  and  sent  orders  for  Fern  to  come  aboard  his  ship, 
which  he  did;  and  Phillips,  not  regarding  his  engagement  to  pardon, 
immediately  ran  his  sword  through  his  body,  and  then  blew  his 
brains  out  with  his  pistol,  and  thus  glutted  his  own  vengeance,  and 
ridded  us  of  a desperate  enemy. 

I mentioned  before,  that  there  were  five  of  us  who  had  not  signed 
the  pirate’s  articles ; and  as  Phillips,  by  killing  Fern,  had  left  but  five 
of  the  old  pirate  crew  alive,  we  began  to  conceive  it  a proper  oppor- 
tunity to  make  our  escape.  We  were,  however,  exceedingly  cautious, 
and  had  not  yet  an  opportunity  to  communicate  our  plans  to  my 
New  England  friend  before  mentioned;  yet  conscience  made  the 
pirates  suspicious  of  something  of  the  kind  being  in  agitation,  and 
from  the  consequent  murderous  procedure  of  Phillips,  we  had  reason 
to  apprehend  they  had  in  reality  discovered  our  intentions. 

My  friend,  the  American  before  mentioned,  being  on  board  the 
vessel  lately  taken  from  Captain  Harridon,  Phillips  ordered  out  a 
boat,  and  went  on  board,  where  he  accused  him  with  joining  a plot, 
assisted  by  me,  to  kill  him  and  all  his  crew,  and  take  the  vessel.  My 
friend  solemnly  denied  the  accusation,  and  declared  he  knew  nothing 
of  such  a plan,  (which  was  in  fact  the  case ; for  I afterwards  learned 
that  there  had  been  nothing  said  to  him  about  it).  This  reply,  how- 
ever true,  did  not  mitigate  the  Captain’s  passion  in  the  least,  for  he 
damned  him,  and  swore  he  would  send  him  to  hell,  and  instantly  ran 
him  through  the  body  with  his  sword,  in  such  a manner  that  he 
twisted  the  point  of  it  off,  leaving  it  in  his  back  bone. 

My  friend,  I suppose,  not  being  conscious  of  having  received  his 
death  wound,  still  denied  the  charge,  and  with  great  earnestness 
begged  that  his  life  might  be  spared;  but  the  Captain,  whose  in- 
satiable thirst  for  slaughter  was  not  sufficiently  gorged,  damned  him, 
presented  his  pistol  and  shot  him  through  the  head,  exclaiming,  I 


36 


JOHN  FILLMORE’S  ADVENTURES. 


have  sent  one  of  the  devils  to  hell;  and  where  is  Fillmore?  he  shall 
go  next.  I was  then  ordered  to  go  aboard  Harridon’s  vessel. 

My  long  familiarity  with,  and  constant  apprehension  of  death, 
rendered  its  near  approaches  less  terrifying  than  formerly;  but  I did 
not  receive  this  sentence  without  heart  rending  sensations,  and 
thrilling  emotions  of  trepidation  and  fear.  But  Phillips  was  com- 
pletely despotic  and  there  was  no  such  thing  as  evading  his  com- 
mands ; I therefore  drew  up  a resolution,  that  if  I found  he  was  bent 
on  my  death,  I would  sell  my  life  as  dear  as  possible,  and  endeavor 
to  kill  him  first.  With  this  resolution,  and  as  much  fortitude  as  I 
could  muster,  I went  on  board  to  Phillips,  and  stood  by  a handspike 
that  lay  on  the  deck.  Phillips  charged  me,  as  he  had  done  my  friend, 
with  contriving  to  betray  him,  and  take  the  ship.  The  accusation 
was  true  enough,  but  I concluded  a lie  was  warrantable  in  that  case, 
and  consequently  replied,  that  I knew  nothing  of  any  conspiracy 
either  against  him  or  his  crew.  I had  prepared  to  make  resistance,  in 
case  he  offered  any  abuse;  but  he  had  a pistol  concealed  under  his 
coat,  which  he  presented  to  my  breast,  and  snapped  it,  before  I had 
time  to  make  any  evasion;  but  happily  for  me  it  missed  fire.  He 
drew  it  back,  cocked,  and  presented  it  again,  but  I struck  it  aside 
with  my  hand,  so  that  it  went  off  by  my  side,  without  doing  any 
injury. 

I thought  of  knocking  out  his  brains  with  the  handspike  that  lay 
near  me,  but  I knew  it  would  be  instant  death  for  me,  and  therefore 
concluded  if  he  would  leave  me,  I would  not  meddle  with  him  at  that 
juncture.  He  then  swung  his  sword  over  my  head,  damned  me,  and 
bid  me  go  about  my  business,  adding,  that  he  only  did  it  to  try  me. 
These  last  words  raised  my  spirits  one  degree  higher  than  they  had 
been  before;  for  I confess  I thought  that  snapping  a loaded  pistol 
at  a man’s  breast,  was  a harsh  mode  of  trial,  and  such  an  one  as  I 
had  by  no  means  been  accustomed  to  before.  I stopped  to  take  up 
the  handspike,  thinking  to  try  him  with  the  butt  end  of  that;  but 
upon  a moment’s  consideration,  concluded  to  let  the  matter  rest  a 
little  longer,  and  watch  for  a more  convenient  opportunity  to  resent 
the  injury.  The  pistol  missing  fire  when  snapped  at  my  breast  and 
then  going  off  by  my  side,  was  a strong  indication  to  me  that  Provi- 
dence had  interposed  graciously  in  my  preservation,  that  our  final 
deliverance  from  the  barbarity  of  the  savage  Phillips,  and  his 
abandoned  banditti,  might  be  more  speedily  effected. 

A few  weeks  now  ensued  which  were  spent  in  tolerable  good 
humor  and  peace  among  all  hands  on  board,  and  myself  and  friends 
put  on  the  semblance  of  content  as  much  as  possible,  though  we  were 
incessantly  seeking  opportunities  to  confer  with  each  other  upon 


JOHN  FILLMORE’S  ADVENTURES. 


37 


some  mode  of  escape ; but  no  proper  opportunity  occurred,  nor  indeed 
were  our  measures  properly  concerted  as  yet. 

Again  we  were  called  upon  to  sign  their  flagitious  articles,  and 
become  willing  members  of  the  piratical  band,  with  menaces  of  imme- 
diate death  in  case  we  still  refused ; but  we  had  heard  their  threats 
too  often  to  be  frightened  into  compliance  with  them  now. 

A short  time  after  this,  being  about  nine  months  after  I was  taken, 
and  about  two  from  the  time  we  fell  in  with  and  made  prize  of  the 
vessel  on  board  of  which  Harridon  was  taken,  the  crew,  in  com- 
memoration of  some  signal  advantage  which  they  had  obtained,  had 
a grand  carouse,  eating  and  drinking,  and  spending  the  day  in  such 
diversions  as  their  gross  inclinations  required.  A favorable  oppor- 
tunity now  seemed  to  offer  to  extricate  us  from  our  suffering,  and 
we  determined  to  improve  it  if  possible.  Cheeseman  was  ordered 
by  Phillips,  to  bring  some  tools  on  deck,  and  do  something  towards 
repairing  the  ship  early  next  morning,  and  the  master  was  ordered 
to  take  an  observation  next  day  at  noon,  to  find  out  where  we  were. 
Thus  far  Providence  seemed  to  favor  our  design,  and  we  felt  firm  in 
the  determination  of  executing  it  the  next  day. 

It  was  late  in  the  evening  before  the  pirates  retired  to  rest,  and 
White  and  one  more  of  the  pirates  got  in  the  caboose,  as  drunk  as 
beasts,  and  lay  down  before  the  fire;  a favorable  opportunity  now 
seemed  to  offer  for  us  to  improve  in  conferring  upon  some  means  for 
our  escape.  We  got  together,  held  a consultation,  and  concluded  to 
risk  our  lives  in  trying  to  work  our  deliverance,  concluding  that  we 
had  better  die  in  so  just  a cause,  than  share  the  fate  of  our  New 
England  friend,  which  we  had  no  doubt  would  soon  overtake  us,  if 
we  persisted  in  our  determination  never  to  sign  their  articles  or  share 
in  their  unlawful  gain. 

When  I mention  that  we  had  determined  on  an  immediate  execu- 
tion of  our  design,  I would  inform  the  reader  that  there  was  but  three 
of  us,  Cheeseman,  myself,  and  the  Spanish  Indian  before  mentioned; 
for  poor  Harridon  declared,  that  his  heart  was  broken,  his  resolution 
and  courage  gone  by  a series  of  ill  usage,  and  that  he  durst  not  en- 
gage to  assist,  but  would  not  discover  our  plot.  Thus  there  remained 
only  three  of  us  to  engage  the  whole  crew,  and  the  Indian  we  felt 
rather  dubious  about,  though  we  gained  a confidence  in  him  from  his 
having  firmly  refused  several  times,  though  threatened  with  imme- 
diate death,  to  subscribe  the  piratical  articles.  However,  I must  do 
him  the  honor  to  say  he  was  true  to  his  trust;  and  had  it  not  been 
for  him,  our  plot  would  most  probably  have  failed  in  the  execution. 

Cheeseman,  the  Indian,  and  myself,  got  together,  and  agreed  that 
Cheeseman  should  leave  his  broad  axe  on  the  main  deck  when  he  had 


38 


JOHN  FILLMORE’S  ADVENTURES. 


done  using  it,  and  when  I saw  Cheeseman  make  ready  to  grasp  the 
master,  I was  to  catch  it  up,  and  make  the  best  use  of  it  I could, 
cutting  and  slashing  all  that  offered  to  oppose  me,  while  the  Indian 
was  to  stand  ready  to  help,  as  occasion  might  require.  And  each  one 
of  us,  in  the  mean  time,  was  to  do  everything  he  could  think  of  to 
forward  the  design. 

Our  plan  being  thus  concerted,  I went  down  into  the  caboose, 
where  White  and  John  Rose  Archer,  a desperate  fellow  who  had 
been  taken  in  one  of  the  prizes,  and  immediately  joined  the  pirates, 
laid  on  the  floor,  as  before  mentioned,  drunk  as  beasts.  I took  fire 
and  burnt  these  two  villains  in  the  feet,  while  they  lay  senseless,  so 
badly  as  to  render  them  unable  to  be  upon  deck  next  day.  There 
were  only  four  now  left  of  the  old  pirate  gang,  and  five  who  had 
joined  them  since,  besides  the  two  I had  rendered  incapable  of  injur- 
ing us. 

We  were  up  early  in  the  morning,  and  Cheeseman  used  the  broad 
axe,  and  left  it  as  agreed.  It  was  very  late  in  the  morning,  and  the 
pirates  were  none  of  them  up,  and  we  were  afraid  they  would  not 
arise  until  too  late  to  take  an  observation,  and  our  plan  of  conse- 
quence must  fall  through.  To  prevent  this,  about  ten  o’clock  I went 
to  the  cabin  door  and  told  the  Captain  the  sun  was  almost  up  to  the 
meridian.  Damn  you,  said  he,  it  is  none  of  your  business.  This  was 
all  the  thanks  I got,  and  indeed  all  I expected  for  my  service.  How- 
ever, it  answered  the  end  designed,  for  the  Captain,  Master,  Boat- 
swain, and  Quarter-master,  came  upon  the  deck,  a little  after  eleven 
o’clock.  Enquiry  was  made  for  White  and  Archer  and  their  burns 
imputed  to  accident.  Harridon  was  nearly  dead  with  fear,  and  the 
Indian  became  so  near  as  white  as  any  of  us.  Phillips  took  notice  of 
Harridon’s  paleness,  and  I cloaked  the  matter  by  informing  him, 
that  Harridon  had  been  sick  all  night,  and  I believed  a dram  would 
help  him.  Phillips  told  me  to  go  to  his  case  and  get  a bottle  of 
brandy;  which  I did,  and  we  all  drank  heartily  except  the  Indian, 
who  refused  to  taste  a drop,  though  something  apt  to  drink  at  other 
times. 

The  important  crisis  drew  near,  when  three  of  us  were  to  attack 
the  whole  crew;  the  Master  prepared  to  take  his  observation,  and 
Cheeseman  was  walking  the  deck  with  a hammer  in  his  hand.  The 
Quarter-master  was  in  the  cabin,  drawing  out  some  leaden  slugs  for 
a musket,  and  the  Spanish  Indian  stood  by  the  cabin  door.  The  Cap- 
tain and  Boatswain  stood  by  the  mainmast,  talking  upon  some  mat- 
ters, and  I stood  partly  behind  them,  whirling  the  axe  around  with 
my  foot,  till  my  knees  fairly  smote  together. 

The  Master  being  busied,  I saw  Cheeseman  make  the  motion  to 
heave  him  over,  and  I at  that  instant,  split  the  boatswain’s  head  in 


JOHN  FILLMORE’S  ADVENTURES. 


39 


twain  with  the  broad  axe,  and  dropped  him  upon  the  deck  to  welter 
in  his  gore.  Before  the  Captain  had  time  to  put  himself  in  a posture 
of  defence,  I gave  him  a stroke  with  the  head  of  my  axe,  which 
partly  stunned  him;  at  which  time  Cheeseman  having  despatched  the 
Master  overboard,  came  to  my  assistance,  and  gave  the  Captain  a 
blow  with  his  hammer,  on  the  back  side  of  his  head,  which  put  an 
immediate  end  to  his  mortal  existence. 

The  Quarter-master  hearing  the  bustle,  came  running  out  of  the 
cabin  with  his  hand  up  to  strike  Cheeseman  with  his  hammer,  and 
would  probably  have  killed  him,  had  not  the  Indian  catched  him  by 
the  elbow,  as  he  was  bringing  the  hammer  down,  and  there  held  him, 
until  I came  up  and  gave  him  a blow  on  the  back  side  of  his  head, 
cutting  his  wig  and  neck  almost  off,  so  that  his  head  hung  down 
before  him. 

We  had  now  despatched  all  the  old  pirates  except  White,  and  de- 
manded a surrender  of  the  vessel,  which  was  granted,  and  the  poor 
Frenchmen  and  negroes  came  to  us  and  embraced  our  legs  and  feet, 
begging  for  their  lives. 

We  carried  the  vessel  safely  into  Boston,  where  White,  Archer, 
and  one  more  of  the  pirates  were  tried,  condemned  and  executed; 
the  three  other  pirates  were  sent  to  England,  with  the  vessel,  with 
whom  my  friend  Cheeseman  and  the  Indian  went  likewise,  whom 
government  liberally  regarded  for  their  services,  and  gave  Cheese- 
man an  honorable  berth  in  one  of  the  king’s  shipyards;  the  three 
pirates  who  went  home  with  the  vessel,  were  hung  at  execution  dock, 
and  the  vessel  was  made  a prize  of  by  government. 

I never  saw  any  of  the  human  species  more  spiteful  than  White 
was,  from  the  time  he  was  taken  till  he  was  executed.  I believe  he 
would  have  killed  me  at  any  time  in  that  interval,  had  it  been  in  his 
power. 

The  honorable  court  which  condemned  the  pirates  gave  me  Cap- 
tain Phillips’  gun,  silver  hilted  sword,  silver  shoe  and  knee  buckles, 
a curious  tobacco  box,  and  two  gold  rings  that  the  pirate  Captain 
Phillips  used  to  wear. 

When  we  came  in  sight  of  the  castle  near  Boston,  we  hoisted  our 
_ pirate’s  colors  and  fired  a gun,  as  a signal  for  them  to  come  off  to  us. 
At  this  time  some  of  the  pirates  were  on  deck,  and  one  of  them  asked 
leave  to  fire  another  gun,  which  being  granted,  he  would  not  swab 
the  gun  out  nor  have  the  vent  stopped,  but  put  in  the  cartridge,  and 
stood  directly  before  the  muzzle  to  ram  it  down,  by  which  means 
the  cartridge  took  fire  and  blew  him  into  pieces ; it  is  supposed  he  did 
this  purposely,  in  order  to  escape  the  punishment  which  he  knew 
must  be  his  lot  in  case  he  was  carried  into  the  harbor. 


MARY  ABIGAIL  FILLMORE. 


Born  March  27,  1832. 


Died  July  26,  1 854. 


MILLARD  FILLMORE 


IN  THE  LEGISLATURE 


OF  NEW  YORK 


MR.  FILLMORE’S  SERVICE  IN 


THE  NEW  YORK  LEGISLATURE 


In  the  fall  of  1828  Mr.  Fillmore  was  elected  member  of 
the  New  York  State  Assembly  from  Erie  County.  During 
his  service  in  that  body,  the  county,  which  then  consisted  of 
two  districts,  was  represented  as  follows : 

1829.  David  Burt,  Millard1  Fillmore. 

1830.  Millard  Fillmore,  Edmund  Hull. 

1831.  Millard  Fillmore,  Nathaniel  Knight. 

So  far  as  the  Assembly  journals  for  1829  record,  Mr. 
Fillmore  did  little  speaking  in  the  House.  January  9th,  he 
was  made  a member  of  the  committee  on  bills;  and  on 
February  9th,  as  chairman  of  a select  committee,  to  which 
was  referred  a “petition  of  sundry  inhabitants  of  the  town 
of  Aurora  in  the  county  of  Erie,  praying  for  the  passage  of 
a law  to  authorize  them  to  apply  a part  of  their  poor  funds 
to  the  improvement  of  roads  and  bridges  in  said  town,”  he 


1.  In  the  legislative  manuals  published  during  Mr.  Fillmore’s  terms  of 
service,  his  name  is  spelled  “Millerd.”  It  is  usually  so  spelled  in  the  printed 
journals  of  the  Assembly.  The  same  spelling  was  used  in  the  early  advertise- 
ments of  his  law  business  in  Buffalo.  The  editor  has  not  found  any  auto- 
graph of  Mr.  Fillmore  giving  that  spelling  of  his  first  name,  though  appar- 
ently he  sanctioned  it  for  some  years,  while  usually  signing  himself  “M. 
Fillmore.” 


43 


44 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


made  the  following  report,  which  is  the  first  document 
known  to  have  been  written  by  him  in  his  public  service : 

mr.  fillmore's  first  legislative  measure — to  repair 

AURORA  BRIDGES. 

“Mr.  Fillmore,  from  the  select  committee  to  which  was 
referred  the  petition  of  sundry  inhabitants  of  the  town  of 
Aurora  in  the  county  of  Erie,  reported: 

“That  the  following  facts  appear  by  said  petition  (the 
truth  of  which  the  committee  have  no  reason  to  doubt),  to 
wit:  That  there  are  in  said  town  of  Aurora  several  large 
and  expensive  bridges,  situated  on  important  roads  leading 
across  the  western  and  middle  branches  of  the  Buffalo 
creek:  That  the  said  town  has  for  some  years  past,  raised 
by  tax  as  large  a sum  as  the  present  law  will  permit  them  to 
raise,  and  found  the  same  insufficient  to  defray  the  expenses 
of  building  said  bridges,  and  keeping  them  in  repair : That 
there  is  now  in  the  hands  of  the  overseers  of  the  poor  of 
said  town,  the  sum  of  about  three  hundred  and  fifty  dollars, 
belonging  to  the  poor  funds  of  said  town ; and  that  there  is 
not  now,  nor  has  there  been  for  some  time  past,  any  paupers 
chargeable  to,  or  supported  by  said  town.  The  petitioners 
therefore  pray  that  a law  may  be  passed,  authorising  and 
requiring  the  overseers  of  the  poor  of  said  town,  to  pay  over 
so  much  of  said  money  now  remaining  in  their  hands,  to  the 
commissioners  of  highways  of  said  town,  as  the  inhabitants 
thereof,  at  their  town  meeting,  shall  by  vote  direct,  to  be  by 
said  commissioners  expended  in  like  manner  as  other  moneys 
coming  into  their  hands  are  by  law  to  be  expended. 

“However  sacred  this  fund  should  in  general  be  held,  yet 
under  the  circumstances  of  this  case,  where  there  appears  to 
be  no  special  object  in  want  of  this  charitable  fund,  or  likely 
to  require  it,  as  it  is  a notorious  fact  that  the  said  county  has 
lately  erected  a poor-house ; and  where  the  conveniences  of 
the  town  and  public  at  large  will  be  greatly  promoted  by 
applying  a part  of  it  to  the  repairs  of  the  bridges  in  said 
town,  which  without  it  will  soon  be  impassable;  the  com- 
mittee are  of  opinion  that  the  prayer  of  the  petitioners  ought 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


45 


to  be  granted,  and  have  directed  their  chairman  to  ask  leave 
to  introduce  a bill  accordingly. 

“Ordered,  That  leave  be  given  to  bring  in  such  a bill.”  1 

Not  long  before  this,  it  will  be  remembered,  Mr.  Fillmore 
had  been  the  village  school-teacher  at  Aurora — now  East 
Aurora.  To  a select  committee  of  which  he  was  chairman, 
the  Assembly,  February  9th,  referred  a petition  of  Joseph 
Howard,  Jr.,  and  other  inhabitants  of  Aurora,  on  which 
Mr.  Fillmore  made  the  following  report  for  his  committee : 

TO  SELL  THE  OLD  AURORA  SCHOOLHOUSE. 

“That  it  appears  from  said  petition,  the  truth  of  which 
is  verified  by  the  certificate  of  the  trustees  of  school  district 
number  one  in  the  town  of  Aurora  and  county  of  Erie,  that 
said  district  were  the  owners  of  a certain  piece  of  land, 
which  had  been  conveyed  to  their  predecessors  in  office,  for 
a lot  on  which  to  erect  a school-house  in  said  district : That 
a school-house  had  been  built  thereon,  and  occupied  by  said 
district,  until  a little  more  than  a year  since,  when  the  house 
had  become  so  dilapidated  that  it  was  found  necessary  to 
erect  a new  one : That  the  inhabitants  of  said  district  were 
of  opinion  that  a better  site  for  a school-house  could  be  pro- 
cured than  this,  as  it  was  situated  so  near  the  centre  of  busi- 
ness in  the  village,  that  the  school  was  frequently  inter- 
rupted by  noise ; and  they  accordingly  got  the  consent  of  the 
school  commissioners  to  remove  the  site,  and  voted  to  re- 
move the  same:  That  they  there  voted  that  the  old  lot 
should  be  sold  to  the  one  who  would  give  the  most  for  it; 
and  it  was  accordingly  sold  to  the  said  Joseph  Howard 
junior,  for  the  sum  of  34  dollars,  and  conveyed  to  him  by  a 
quit  claim  deed  from  the  trustees  of  said  district ; and  that 
the  consideration  money  therefor  has  been  duly  paid  by  him 
to  the  trustees  of  said  district,  and  by  them  duly  applied 
towards  the  building  of  the  new  school-house : But  on  inves- 
tigation, it  was  found  that  the  said  district  could  not  convey 


1.  Assembly  Journal,  1829,  p.  403-4. 


46 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


their  real  estate,  without  being  specially  authorised  by  an 
act  of  the  Legislature;  and  therefore,  as  well  the  trustees 
as  the  inhabitants  of  said  district,  have  united  with  the  said 
Joseph  Howard  junior,  in  his  petition,  praying  that  said 
conveyance  may  be  confirmed  and  rendered  valid  by  an  act 
of  the  Legislature:  And  the  committee  are  of  opinion  that 
justice  and  equity  require  that  the  prayer  of  the  petitioners 
should  be  granted,  and  have  directed  their  chairman  to  ask 
leave  to  introduce  a bill  accordingly. 

“Ordered,  That  leave  be  given  to  bring  in  such  a bill.”  1 

There  is  also  record  that  on  February  ioth,  on  motion 
of  Mr.  Fillmore, 

Ordered,  That  the  report  of  the  comptroller  on  the  peti- 
tion of  William  Williams,  receiver  of  the  Bank  of  Niagara, 
together  with  the  documents  accompanying  the  same,  be 
referred  to  the  committee  on  the  incorporation  and  altera- 
tion of  the  charters  of  banking  and  insurance  companies. 

The  foregoing  indicate  the  character  of  matters  which 
engaged  his  attention  at  the  outset  of  his  public  career. 

In  the  session  of  1830,  he  came,  naturally,  into  more 
prominence.  The  following  memoranda  are  from  the 
Assembly  journal  of  1830: 

On  motion  of  Mr.  Fillmore, 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  judiciary  be  in- 
structed to  inquire  into  the  constitutionality  of  the  law 
passed  at  the  last  session  of  the  Legislature,  relative  to  the 
election  of  justices  of  the  peace,  and  report  their  opinion 
thereon  to  this  house. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  Fillmore, 

Resolved,  That  the  memorial  of  Christopher  P.  Bellinger 
and  others,  praying  an  investigation  into  the  conduct  of  the 
Grand  Chapter  of  Freemasons  of  the  State  of  New-York,  be 
referred  to  a select  committee,  and  that  such  committee  have 


1.  Assembly  Journal,  1829,  p.  409-10. 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


47 


power  to  send  for  persons  and  papers,  and  be  required  to 
report  to  this  House  by  bill  or  otherwise. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  Fillmore, 

Resolved , That  this  House  will,  after  this  day,  hold  an 
afternoon  session  to  commence  at  four  o’clock,  at  which  all 
petitions  shall  be  presented  and  all  reports  from  standing 
and  select  committees  shall  be  received.1 

One  other  subject  that  received  Mr.  Fillmore’s  special 
attention,  in  the  session  of  1830,  was  a petition  of  John  I. 
Van  der  Kemp,  general  agent  of  the  Holland  Land  Com- 
pany, praying  for  the  passage  of  an  act  to  enable  Wilhem 
Willink  and  others  “to  purchase,  take  and  hold  certain  real 
estate,”  etc.  Another  issue  was  a memorial  praying  for  an 
investigation  into  the  conduct  of  the  Grand  Chapter  of 
Freemasons  in  the  State  of  New  York.  Mr.  Fillmore  (an 
Anti-Mason)  sought  to  have  it  referred  to  a select  committee 
of  the  House,  but  the  charges  were  finally  placed  in  the 
hands  of  the  attorney  general. 

In  the  Legislature  of  1830,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  a member, 
but  not  chairman,  of  the  committee  on  subjects  relating  to 
the  public  defense. 

January  22d,  he  voted  for  the  bill  to  incorporate  the 
Buffalo  and  Hamburgh  Turnpike  Company;  January  23d, 
he  gave  notice  that  he  would  ask  leave  to  introduce  a bill  to 
change  the  name  of  “The  Buffalo  High  School  Association” 
to  that  of  “The  Buffalo  Literary  and  Scientific  Academy.” 
Granted  January  26th,  and  referred  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole;  February  17th,  he  introduced  a bill  “to  authorize 
the  supervisors  of  the  town  of  Holland  in  the  County  of 
Erie,  to  collect  certain  moneys  from  his  predecessor  in  office, 
and  pay  the  same  over  to  the  commissioners  of  common 
schools  of  said  town” — referred  to  a select  committee  of 


x.  Assembly  Journal,  1830,  pp.  83,  344,  486. 


48 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


which  Mr.  Fillmore  was  chairman;  March  3d,  “An  act 
relative  to  the  Court  of  General  Sessions  of  the  County  of 
Erie,”  was  referred  to  a select  committee  consisting  of  Mr. 
Fillmore,  Mr.  Edmund  Hull  and  Mr.  Samuel  DeVeaux; 
March  19th,  as  chairman  of  a select  committee,  Mr.  Fillmore 
reported  “An  act  concerning  the  State  Road  from  Fredonia 
in  the  County  of  Chatauque,  to  the  village  of  Perry  in  the 
County  of  Genesee.”  April  3d,  “An  act  relative  to  the 
Court  of  General  Sessions  of  the  County  of  Erie,”  was 
referred  to  a select  committee  of  which  Mr.  Fillmore  was 
chairman.  April  6th,  “An  act  to  authorize  Clark  Hilton  to 
erect  a dam  and  lock  upon  Tonawanda  Creek,”  was  referred 
to  a select  committee  of  which  Mr.  Fillmore  was  chairman. 

In  the  session  of  1831,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  chairman  of  the 
committee  on  two-thirds  bills.  Matters  referred  to  him  in 
this  capacity,  or  as  chairman  of  special  committees,  included 
a petition  of  Erie  County  supervisors  for  permission  to  sell 
the  jail  lot  and  erect  a new  jail;  a petition  of  inhabitants 
of  the  town  of  Clarence  and  Amherst  in  Erie  County  rela- 
tive to  burying-grounds,  which  led  Mr.  Fillmore  to  prepare 
a bill  applicable  to  the  county  at  large;  a petition  for  the 
incorporation  of  the  Buffalo  Female  Seminary;  a bill 
relating  to  the  support  of  common  schools  in  the  city  of  New 
York;  etc.,  etc.  The  following  reports  are  signed  by  Mr. 
Fillmore  as  chairman,  and  probably  were  written  by  him: 

In  Assembly,  January  18,  1831,  Mr.  Fillmore,  from  the 
select  committee  to  whom  was  referred  the  petition  of  the 
supervisors  of  the  County  of  Erie,  reported: 

THE  OLD  ERIE  COUNTY  JAIL. 

“That  they  have  had  said  petition  under  consideration; 
and  it  appears  from  the  facts  stated  in  said  petition,  the 
truth  of  which  the  committee  have  no  reason  to  doubt,  that 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


49 


the  jail  in  said  county  was  erected  at  an  early  period,  and  is 
now  much  too  small  to  answer  the  purposes  for  which  it 
was  erected.  That  its  internal  arrangements  are  bad,  and 
cannot  be  remedied  without  entirely  rebuilding  it ; and  that 
its  location  is  not  convenient.  They  therefore  pray  for  the 
passage  of  a law  authorizing  them  to  sell  and  convey  the 
same,  together  with  the  lot  on  which  said  jail  is  situated, 
and  apply  the  proceeds  towards  the  erection  of  a new  jail, 
to  be  erected  on  the  lot  upon  which  the  court  house  stands 
in  said  county,  in  rear  of  the  same,  and  also  for  authority  to 
raise  by  tax  such  further  sum  as  may  be  necessary,  not  ex- 
ceeding three  thousand  dollars,  to  build  and  complete  such 
jail. 

“Believing  that  it  would  be  for  the  interest  of  said  county 
to  build  such  new  jail,  instead  of  attempting  to  repair  the 
old  one,  and  that  a new  jail  is  necessary,  the  committee  have 
come  to  the  unanimous  conclusion  that  the  prayer  of  said 
petitioners  is  reasonable,  and  ought  to  be  granted,  and  have 
directed  their  chairman  to  report  a bill  accordingly,  and  ask 
leave  to  introduce  the  same.,, 

February  ioth,  Mr.  Fillmore,  from  the  committee  on  two- 
thirds  bills,  reported  at  length  on  “An  act  amendatory  of 
the  ‘Act  for  the  relief  of  the  heirs  of  Christian  Guthrie’,”  a 
soldier  of  the  New  York  line  in  the  War  of  the  Revolution, 
who  was  killed  in  battle,  July,  1778.  He  was  returned  as  a 
dead  soldier  by  the  name  of  Christian  Gutrick ; and  a patent 
was  issued  to  him  by  the  name  of  Gutrick,  for  lot  No.  90  in 
the  town  of  Milton ; in  1820  this  lot  escheated  to  the  State. 
Mr.  Fillmore,  for  his  committee,  made  a long  report  on  the 
case,  holding  that  the  State  had  not  discharged  its  obligation 
to  Guthrie,  by  conveying  land  to  “Gutrick.”  The  case  has 
no  general  interest;  but  the  length  and  logic  of  the  report 
illustrate  Mr.  Fillmore’s  conscientious  thoroughness,  and 
judicial  attitude  of  mind.1 


1.  Assembly  Docs.,  1831,  Nos.  144,  146. 


50 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


In  Assembly,  February  14,  1831,  Mr.  Fillmore,  from  the 
select  committee  to  which  was  referred  the  petition  of  Henry 
F.  Penfield,  reported: 

AN  OLD  HORSE-BOAT  FERRY  ON  THE  NIAGARA.1 

“That  they  have  had  said  petition  under  consideration; 
and  it  appears  from  the  petition  that  an  act  was  passed  in 
1826  by  which  the  said  petitioner  and  Ogden  Edwards,  the 
proprietor  of  Squaw  Island,  in  Niagara  river,  were  author- 
ized to  establish  a ferry  from  said  island  to  the  Canada 
shore ; the  duration  of  which  act  was  limited  to  the  term  of 
five  years  from  the  first  day  of  May,  1826. 

“The  said  petition  also  states  that  the  petitioner  and  his 
associate  have  complied  with  the  provisions  of  the  act  of 
1826,  establishing  said  ferry,  and  have  a good  horse-boat  in 
operation  at  said  ferry;  and  for  reasons  which  are  stated 
in  the  petition,  said  ferry  has  hitherto  afforded  very  little 
income ; they  therefore  pray  that  the  provisions  of  said  act 
may  be  extended  for  the  term  of  ten  years  beyond  its  present 
limitation. 

“It  appears  from  the  papers  before  your  committee,  that 
notice  of  this  application  has  been  published  in  the  State 
paper  and  in  a paper  printed  in  the  county  where  said  ferry 
is  established,  for  six  weeks ; and  although  your  committee 
are  of  opinion  that  this  notice  is  unnecessary,  yet  as  no 
remonstrance  has  been  sent  in  to  oppose  the  application,  it  is 
very  strong  evidence  that  there  is  no  opposition  to  the  prayer 
of  the  petitioner. 

“Your  committee  have  therefore  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  prayer  of  the  petitioner  is  reasonable,  and  ought  to 
be  granted,  and  have  directed  their  chairman  to  ask  leave  to 
introduce  a bill  accordingly.” 

In  Assembly,  March  12,  1831,  Mr.  Fillmore,  from  the 
select  committee  to  whom  was  referred  the  petition  of  the 

1.  This  should  not  be  mistaken  for  the  old  Black  Rock  ferry  further  up 
the  river.  For  a history  of  that,  the  most  important  ferry  on  the  Niagara,  see 
Buffalo  Historical  Society  Publications,  Vol.  I,  pp.  91-109. 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


51 


inhabitants  of  the  town  of  Erie,  in  the  County  of  Erie, 
reported : 

“That  they  have  had  said  petition  under  consideration, 
and  the  petitioners  allege,  that  they  suffer  great  inconveni- 
ence in  the  transaction  of  business  through  the  postoffice, 
inasmuch  as  there  is  a town  and  county  of  the  same  name, 
in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania,  to  which  letters  intended  for 
persons  residing  in  that  town  in  this  State,  are  frequently 
sent,  to  the  great  injury  and  detriment  of  the  persons  for 
whom  they  were  intended.  These  mistakes,  it  seems,  some- 
times occur  through  the  ignorance  of  the  postmasters,  and 
sometimes  through  the  neglect  of  persons  directing  their 
letters,  in  omitting  to  mention  the  name  of  the  State.  The 
mistakes,  however,  are  so  frequent,  and  the  remedy  so  easy, 
that  your  committee  have  come  to  the  conclusion,  that  the 
prayer  of  the  petitioners  to  change  the  name  of  said  town, 
is  reasonable  and  ought  to  be  granted ; and  they  have  there- 
fore directed  their  chairman  to  ask  leave  to  introduce  a bill 
accordingly.1 

BUFFALO  VILLAGE  FIRE  PROTECTION. 

In  Assembly,  March  15,  1831,  Mr.  Fillmore,  from  the 
select  committee  to  whom  was  referred  the  petition  of  the 
inhabitants  of  the  village  of  Buffalo,  reported: 

“That  they  have  had  said  petition  under  consideration, 
and  the  petitioners  allege  that  the  village  of  Buffalo  is  very 
much  exposed  to  fire,  and  the  provisions  to  guard  against  it 

1.  There  have  been  two  towns  of  Erie  in  Western  New  York,  but  they 
were  six  miles  apart  at  the  nearest  point.  The  old  town  of  Erie  was  one  of 
the  original  towns  of  Genesee  County  (then  embracing  present  Erie  County), 
established  by  the  Holland  Land  Company  in  1804.  It  comprised  the  seventh, 
eighth,  ninth  and  tenth  ranges,  and  stretched  the  whole  width  of  the  State, 
from  the  Pennsylvania  line,  where  it  was  twenty-four  miles  wide,  to  Lake 
Ontario,  its  northern  half  being  from  eight  to  twenty  miles.  The  Buffalo 
Historical  Society  owns  the  original  “Town  Book  of  the  Town  of  Erie,  1805 
and  1806,”  but  the  few  entries  refer  only  to  license  fees  and  money  for  the 
poor.  This  town  of  Erie  was  obliterated  from  the  list  of  political  organizations 
in  1808.  The  Legislature  in  1823  erected  a new  town  of  Erie,  from  a part 
of  Clarence,  which  is  the  one  referred  to  by  Mr.  Fillmore.  The  petition  was 
granted,  and  the  town  of  Erie  became  Newstead,  which  name  it  still  bears. 


52 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


are  totally  inadequate  to  effect  that  object;  and  that  by  the 
present  law  they  can  only  raise  the  sum  of  $2,000  annually, 
for  all  the  expenses  of  said  village.  They  therefore  pray 
for  the  passage  of  a law  authorizing  them  to  raise  the  fur- 
ther sum  of  $3,000  for  the  construction  of  wells  and  reser- 
voirs for  water,  and  the  purchase  of  fire  engines  and  other 
apparatus  for  the  extinguishing  of  fires  in  said  village.  The 
petition  is  signed  by  the  principal  inhabitants  of  said  village, 
and  your  committee  are  of  opinion  that  the  prayer  of  the 
petitioners  is  reasonable  and  ought  to  be  granted,  and  they 
have  therefore  ordered  their  chairman  to  ask  leave  to  intro- 
duce a bill  accordingly.”1 

AN  EDUCATIONAL  PROJECT. 

In  Assembly,  March  28,  1831,  Mr.  Fillmore,  from  the 
select  committee  to  whom  was  referred  the  petition  of  the 
citizens  of  Buffalo,  for  the  incorporation  of  a literary  society 
for  the  education  of  females,  reported : 

“That  they  have  had  the  same  under  consideration ; and 
the  petitioners  allege,  what  is  known  to  a part  of  your  com- 
mittee to  be  true,  that  Buffalo  is  a point  that  presents  many 
and  peculiar  advantages  for  the  location  of  a seminary  for 
the  education  of  females;  its  climate  is  salubrious  and 
healthy;  its  position  is  central  and  pleasant;  and  the  canal 
on  the  one  hand,  and  the  lake  on  the  other,  open  communi- 
cations that  render  it  of  easy  access  to  a vast  extent  of 
country.  The  petitioners  also  allege  that  there  is  no  insti- 
tution of  the  kind  within  one  hundred  miles  of  that  place; 
that  the  academical  institutions  in  the  western  part  of  this 

1 Under  the  law  the  enactment  of  which  followed  this  report,  there  were 
constructed  in  Buffalo,  in  the  fall  of  1831,  four  reservoirs,  or  cisterns,  at  the 
intersections  of  Main  with  Seneca,  Swan,  Eagle  and  Court  streets.  These  res- 
ervoirs held  some  10,000  gallons  each,  and  for  many  years  served  their  purpose 
well.  Others  were  constructed  later.  In  1831  also  two  fire  engines  and  neces- 
sary hose  were  purchased.  The  first  regular  fire  company  in  Buffalo  was 
organized  Dec.  16,  1824.  Mr.  Fillmore  does  not  appear  to  have  been  active 
as  a volunteer  fireman,  but  in  1832  the  Fillmore  (also  called  Fulton)  Engine 
Company  No.  3 was  given  his  name,  presumably  in  recognition  of  his  legisla- 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


53 


State  are  principally  attended  by  males,  and  particularly  the 
one  in  Buffalo  is  attended  by  young  gentlemen  exclusively. 

“Your  committee  deem  it  unnecessary  to  enter  into  any 
arguments,  to  show  the  duty  of  the  Legislature  to  encour- 
age, by  all  means  in  their  power,  so  laudable  an  object  as  the 
education  of  females  in  the  higher  departments  of  litera- 
ture. This  question  has  long  since  been  settled  by  public 
opinion. 

“The  petitioners  pray  for  an  act  of  incorporation,  to  aid 
them  in  this  praiseworthy  undertaking ; and  your  committee 
are  of  opinion  that  their  prayer  should  be  granted  and  have 
directed  their  chairman  to  ask  leave  to  introduce  a bill  ac- 
cordingly.”1 * * * * * * 8 

The  foregoing  show  how  Mr.  Fillmore  at  this  period 
sought  to  serve  his  home  community.  But  the  chief  service 
to  the  State  during  his  legislative  career  at  Albany  was  as 
champion  of  the  movement  to  abolish  imprisonment  for 
debt.  The  history  of  that  movement,  or  rather  of  the  evolu- 
tion of  public  sentiment  in  the  matter,  is  perhaps  a theme 
which  may  some  time  receive  the  attention  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s 
biographer.  For  the  present  purpose  it  must  suffice  to 
record  that  Mr.  Fillmore  was  the  principal  author  of  an  act 
which  passed  the  Assembly  April  2,  1831,  was  amended  and 
finally  signed  by  the  Governor  on  April  26th,  and  which 
appeared  on  the  statute-books  of  the  State  entitled : “An  Act 
to  abolish  imprisonment  for  debt,  and  to  punish  fraudulent 

1.  No  immediate  result  is  known  to  have  come  from  this  effort.  The 

Buffalo  Female  Academy  was  not  incorporated  until  1851.  An  early  educational 

movement  with  which  Mr.  Fillmore  was  connected  was  the  formation,  in  1827, 

of  the  Buffalo  High  School  Association.  A meeting  was  held  at  the  Eagle 

Tavern,  on  November  22d  of  that  year,  at  which  an  act  of  incorporation  was 

drawn  up,  and  a board  of  trustees  were  authorized  to  procure  subscriptions 

to  an  amount  not  less  than  $10,000.  Their  efforts  met  fair  success.  On  Jan. 

8,  1828,  a prospectus  of  Buffalo’s  first  high  school  was  issued.  The  first  Buf- 
falo Directory,  issued  in  1828,  said:  “The  Buffalo  High  School,  incorporated 

in  1827,  capital  not  to  exceed  $25,000,  $10,000  of  which  is  already  subscribed 
and  the  school  commenced,  in  rooms  temporarily  fitted  for  the  purpose,  in 
January  last.  The  buildings  of  this  institution  are  to  be  erected  the  coming 
season.”  The  school  was  successful  for  some  years. 


54 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


debtors.”  The  bill  as  passed  was  written  by  Mr.  Fillmore, 
except  the  portions  relative  to  proceedings  in  courts  of 
record,  which  were  drawn  by  John  C.  Spencer. 

AN  ACT  RELATIVE  TO  IMPRISONMENT  FOR  DEBT. 

An  Act  to  abolish  imprisonment  for  debt,  and  to  punish  fraudulent 
debtors.  Passed  April  26,  1831.1 

Section  i.  No  person  shall  be  arrested  or  imprisoned  on  any 
civil  process  issuing  out  of  any  court  of  law,  or  on  any  execution 
issuing  out  of  any  court  of  equity,  in  any  suit  or  proceeding  insti- 
tuted for  the  recovery  of  any  money  due  upon  any  judgment  or 
decree,  founded  upon  contract  or  due  upon  any  contract  express 
or  implied,  or  for  the  recovery  of  any  damages  for  the  non-perform- 
ance of  any  contract. 

Sec.  2.  The  preceding  section  shall  not  extend  to  any  person  who 
shall  not  have  been  a resident  of  this  State,  for  at  least  one  month 
previous  to  the  commencement  of  a suit  against  him;  nor  to  pro- 
ceedings as  for  contempts  to  enforce  civil  remedies;  nor  to  actions 
for  fines  or  penalties,  or  on  promises  to  marry,  or  for  moneys  col- 
lected by  any  public  officer,  or  for  any  misconduct  or  neglect  in 
office,  or  in  any  professional  employment. 

Sec.  3.  In  all  cases  where,  by  the  preceding  provisions  of  this 
act,  a defendant  cannot  be  arrested  and  imprisoned,  it  shall  be  law- 
ful for  the  plaintiff  who  shall  have  commenced  a suit  against  such 
defendant,  or  shall  have  obtained  a judgment  or  decree  against  him, 
in  any  court  of  record,  to  apply  to  any  judge  of  the  court  in  which 
such  suit  is  brought,  or  to  any  officer  authorized  to  perform  the 
duties  of  such  judge,  for  a warrant  to  arrest  the  defendant  in  such 
suit. 

Sec.  4.  No  such  warrant  shall  issue,  unless  satisfactory  evidence 
be  adduced  to  such  officer,  by  the  affidavit  of  the  plaintiff,  or  of 
some  other  person  or  persons,  that  there  is  a debt  or  demand  due 
to  the  plaintiff,  from  the  defendant,  amounting  to  more  than  fifty 
dollars,  and  specifying  the  nature  and  amount  thereof,  as  near  as 
may  be,  for  which  the  defendant,  according  to  the  provisions  of 
this  act,  cannot  be  arrested  or  imprisoned;  and  establishing  one  or 
more  of  the  following  particulars: 

1.  This  Act,  “chapter  300,  Laws  of  1831,”  was  repealed  by  Law  of  1880, 
chapter  245,  sec.  1,  paragraph  9. 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


55 


1.  That  the  defendant  is  about  to  remove  any  of  his  property 
out  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  in  which  such  suit  is  brought, 
with  intent  to  defraud  his  creditors;  or 

2.  That  the  defendant  has  property  or  rights  in  action,  which 
he  fraudulently  conceals,  or  that  he  has  rights  in  action,  or  some 
interest  in  any  public  or  corporate  stock,  money  or  evidences  of 
debt,  which  he  unjustly  refuses  to  apply  to  the  payment  of  any 
judgment  or  decree  which  shall  have  been  rendered  against  him, 
belonging  to  the  complainant;  or 

3.  That  he  has  assigned,  removed  or  disposed  of,  or  is  about 
to  dispose  of,  any  of  his  property,  with  the  intent  to  defraud  his 
creditors;  or 

4.  That  the  defendant  fraudulently  contracted  the  debt  or 
incurred  the  obligation,  respecting  which  such  suit  is  brought. 

Sec.  5.  Upon  such  proof  being  made  to  the  satisfaction  of  the 
officer  to  whom  the  application  shall  be  addressed,  he  shall  issue  a 
warrant,  in  behalf  of  the  people  of  this  State,  either  with  or  with- 
out seal,  directed  to  any  sheriff,  constable,  or  marshal,  within  the 
county  where  such  officer  shall  reside,  therein  briefly  setting  forth 
the  complaint,  and  commanding  the  officer  to  whom  the  same  shall 
be  directed,  to  arrest  the  person  named  in  such  warrant,  and  bring 
him  before  such  officer  without  delay ; which  warrant  shall  be  accom- 
panied by  a copy  of  all  affidavits  presented  to  such  officer,  upon 
which  the  warrant  issued;  which  shall  be  certified  by  such  officer, 
and  shall  be  delivered  to  the  defendant,  at  the  time  of  serving  the 
warrant,  by  the  officer  serving  the  same. 

Sec.  6.  The  officer  to  whom  such  warrant  shall  be  delivered, 
shall  execute  the  same,  by  arresting  the  person  named  therein,  and 
bringing  him  before  the  officer  issuing  such  warrant;  and  shall 
keep  him  in  custody  until  he  shall  be  duly  discharged,  or  com- 
mitted as  hereinafter  provided. 

Sec.  7.  On  the  appearance  of  the  person  so  arrested,  before  the 
officer  issuing  such  warrant,  he  may  controvert  any  of  the  facts  and 
circumstances  on  which  such  warrant  issued,  and  may,  at  his  option, 
verify  his  allegations  by  his  own  affidavit;  and  in  case  of  his  so 
verifying  the  same,  the  complainant  may  examine  such  defendant 
on  oath,  touching  any  fact  or  circumstance  material  to  the  inquiry, 
and  the  answers  of  the  defendant  on  such  examination,  shall  be 
reduced  to  writing  and  subscribed  by  him;  and  the  officer  conduct- 
ing such  inquiry,  shall  also  receive  such  other  proof  as  the  parties 
may  offer,  either  at  the  time  of  such  first  appearance,  or  at  such 


56 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


other  time  as  such  hearing  shall  be  adjourned  to;  and  in  case  of 
an  adjournment,  such  officer  may  take  a recognizance,  with  or  with- 
out surety,  at  his  discretion,  from  the  defendant,  for  his  appearance 
at  the  adjourned  hearing. 

Sec.  8.  The  officer  conducting  such  inquiry,  shall  have  the  same 
authority  to  issue  subpoenas  for  witnesses,  which  is  now  conferred 
by  law  on  any  officer  empowered  to  hear  applications  of  insolvents, 
for  the  purpose  of  exonerating  their  persons  from  imprisonment, 
and  shall  have  the  same  power  to  enforce  obedience  to  such  sub- 
poenas, and  to  punish  witnesses  refusing  to  testify;  and  witnesses 
wilfully  disobeying  any  such  subpoenas  shall  be  liable  to  the  penal- 
ties prescribed  in  the  seventh  article  of  title  first  and  chapter  fifth 
of  the  second  part  of  the  Revised  Statutes. 

Sec.  9.  If  such  officer  is  satisfied  that  the  allegations  of  the 
complainant  are  substantiated,  and  that  the  defendant  has  done,  or 
is  about  to  do,  any  one  of  the  acts  specified  in  the  fourth  section 
of  this  act,  he  shall  by  a commitment  under  his  hand,  direct  that 
such  defendant  be  committed  to  the  jail  of  the  county  in  which 
such  hearing  shall  be  had,  to  be  there  detained  until  he  shall  be 
discharged  according  to  law;  and  such  defendant  shall  be  com- 
mitted and  detained  accordingly. 

Sec.  10.  Such  commitment  shall  not  be  granted,  if  the  defendant 
shall  either, 

1.  Pay  the  debt  or  demand  claimed,  with  the  costs  of  the  suit 
and  of  the  proceedings  against  him;  or 

2.  Give  security  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  officer  before  whom 
the  hearing  shall  be  had,  that  the  debt  or  demand  of  the  plaintiff, 
with  the  costs  of  the  suit  and  proceedings  aforesaid,  shall  be  paid 
within  sixty  days,  with  interest;  or 

3.  Make  and  deliver  to  such  officer  an  inventory  of  his  estate 
and  an  account  of  his  creditors,  and  execute  an  assignment  of  his 
property  as  hereinafter  provided,  on  which  the  same  proceedings 
shall  be  had  as  upon  a petition  of  such  defendant  in  the  manner 
hereinafter  directed,  except  that  no  notice  to  the  plaintiff  shall  be 
requisite;  and  no  adjournment  shall  be  granted  for  more  than 
three  days,  except  at  the  instance  of  the  defendant;  and  a discharge 
shall  be  granted  in  the  like  case,  and  with  the  same  effect ; or 

4.  Enter  into  a bond  to  the  complainant,  in  a penalty  not  less 
than  twice  the  amount  of  the  debt  or  demand  claimed,  with  such 
sureties  as  shall  be  approved  by  such  officer,  conditioned  that  such 
defendant  will,  within  thirty  days,  apply  for  an  assignment  of  all 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


57 


his  property,  and  for  a discharge,  as  provided  in  the  subsequent  sec- 
tions of  this  act,  and  diligently  prosecute  the  same  until  he  obtains 
such  discharge;  or, 

5.  If  such  defendant  shall  give  a bond  to  such  plaintiff,  in  the 
penalty  and  with  the  sureties  above  prescribed,  conditioned  that  he 
will  not  remove  any  property  which  he  then  has,  out  of  the  juris- 
diction of  the  court  in  which  such  suit  is  brought,  with  the  intent 
to  defraud  any  of  his  creditors;  and  that  he  will  not  assign  or  dis- 
pose of  any  such  property,  with  such  intent,  or  with  a view  to  give 
a preference  to  any  creditor  for  any  debt,  antecedent  to  such  assign- 
ment or  disposition,  until  the  demand  of  the  plaintiff,  with  the  costs, 
shall  be  satisfied,  or  until  the  expiration  of  three  months  after  a 
final  judgment  shall  be  rendered  in  the  suit  brought  for  the  recovery 
of  such  demand. 

Sec.  11.  Any  defendant  committed  as  above  provided,  shall 
remain  in  custody  in  the  same  manner  as  other  prisoners  on  crimi- 
nal process,  until  a final  judgment  shall  have  been  rendered  in  his 
favor,  in  the  suit  prosecuted  by  the  creditor  at  whose  instance  such 
defendant  shall  have  been  committed,  or  until  he  shall  have  assigned 
his  property  and  obtained  his  discharge,  as  provided  in  the  subse- 
quent sections  of  this  act;  but  such  defendant  may  be  discharged 
by  the  officer  committing  him,  or  any  other  person  authorized  to 
discharge  the  duties  of  such  officer,  on  such  defendant  paying  the 
debt  or  demand  claimed,  or  giving  security  for  the  payment  thereof, 
as  provided  in  the  tenth  section  of  this  act,  or  on  his  executing 
either  of  the  bonds  mentioned  in  said  section. 

Sec.  12.  Any  person  committed  as  above  provided,  or  who  shall 
have  given  the  bond  specified  in  the  fourth  subdivision  of  the  tenth 
section  of  this  act,  or  against  whom  any  suit  shall  have  been  com- 
menced in  a court  of  record,  in  which  such  person,  by  the  provi- 
sions of  this  act,  cannot  be  arrested  or  imprisoned,  may  present  a 
petition  to  a justice  of  the  supreme  court,  a circuit  judge,  any  judge 
of  a county  court,  or  any  supreme  court  commissioner  in  the  county 
in  which  such  defendant  resides  or  is  imprisoned,  praying  that  his 
property  may  be  assigned,  and  that  he  may  have  the  benefit  of  the 
provisions  of  this  act. 

Sec.  13.  On  presenting  such  petition,  such  defendant  shall 
deliver  an  account  of  his  creditors,  and  an  inventory  of  his  estate, 
similar  in  all  respects  to  the  account  and  inventory  required  of  a 
debtor,  by  the  sixth  article  of  title  first  and  chapter  five  of  the 
second  part  of  the  Revised  Statutes;  and  shall  annex  to  the  said 


58 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


petition,  account  and  inventory,  an  affidavit,  which  shall  be  taken 
and  subscribed  by  him,  before  the  officer  to  whom  such  petition  is 
presented,  similar  in  all  respects  to  the  oath  required  by  the  fifth 
section  of  the  sixth  article  of  the  aforesaid  title  and  chapter. 

Sec.  14.  Fourteen  days’  previous  notice  of  the  time  and  place 
at  which,  and  of  the  officer  to  whom  such  petition  will  be  presented, 
together  with  a copy  of  such  petition,  and  the  account  of  the  inven- 
tory thereto  annexed,  shall  be  served  personally  on  the  plaintiffs 
by  whom  such  defendant  shall  be  prosecuted,  their  personal  repre- 
sentatives or  their  attorney;  and  proof  of  such  service  shall  be  made 
at  the  time  of  presenting  such  petition. 

Sec.  15.  Any  creditor  of  such  petitioner  may  oppose  such  appli- 
cation, and  may  examine  the  petitioner,  his  wife  or  any  other  wit- 
ness, in  the  manner  prescribed  in  the  third  article  of  the  aforesaid 
first  title  and  fifth  chapter,  and  shall  be  entitled  to  the  like  process 
to  compel  their  attendance  and  testimony;  and  such  witnesses  shall, 
in  all  respects,  be  subject  to  the  provisions  of  the  seventh  article  of 
the  said  title,  for  their  neglect  to  obey  subpoenas,  or  to  testify. 

Sec.  16.  Upon  sufficient  cause  shown  by  the  petitioner,  or  by  any 
creditor,  the  officer  to  whom  such  petition  is  addressed,  may  adjourn 
the  hearing  thereof,  not  exceeding  thirty  days;  and  if,  at  any  hear- 
ing of  such  petition,  the  opposing  creditor  shall  fail  to  satisfy  such 
officer  that  the  proceedings  on  the  part  of  the  petitioner  are  not  just 
and  fair,  or  that  he  has  concealed,  removed  or  disposed  of,  any  of 
his  property,  with  intent  to  defraud  his  creditors;  such  officer  shall 
order  an  assignment  of  all  the  property  of  such  petitioner,  in  the 
same  manner  as  provided  in  the  fifth  article  of  the  first  title  of  the 
fifth  chapter  of  the  second  part  of  the  Revised  Statutes,  except  such 
as  is  therein  exempt;  which  assignment  shall  be  executed  with  the 
like  effect  as  declared  in  the  said  article,  and  shall  be  recorded  in 
the  same  manner. 

Sec.  1 7.  Such  officer  shall  appoint  one  or  more  assignees,  tq 
whom  such  petitioner  shall  assign  all  his  estate;  and  upon  produc- 
ing to  such  officer,  evidence  that  such  assignment  has  been  recorded, 
and  a certificate  of  the  assignees,  that  all  the  property  of  such  peti- 
tioner, specified  in  his  inventory,  has  been  delivered  to  them,  or 
that  he  has  given  satisfactory  security  for  the  future  delivery  of  the 
same,  such  officer  shall  grant  to  the  petitioner  a discharge,  which 
shall  exonerate  him  from  being  proceeded  against  by  any  creditor 
entitled  to  a dividend  of  the  estate  of  such  petitioner,  as  hereinafter 
provided,  under  the  third,  fourth,  fifth,  sixth,  seventh,  eighth  and 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


59 


ninth  sections  of  this  act,  for  any  fraud  committed  or  intended 
before  such  discharge. 

Sec.  18.  The  assignees  to  whom  such  assignment  shall  be  made, 
shall  be  vested  with  all  the  rights  and  powers  over  the  property  so 
assigned,  which  are  specified  in  the  eighth  article  of  the  first  title 
of  chapter  five  of  the  second  part  of  the  Revised  Statutes,  and  shall 
be  subject  to  the  same  duties,  obligations,  and  control,  in  all  respects, 
and  shall  make  dividends;  and  vacancies  in  their  number,  shall  be 
supplied  as  therein  directed. 

Sec.  19.  The  general  provisions  applicable  to  proceedings  under 
the  several  articles  of  the  said  first  title,  and  which  are  contained 
in  the  seventh  article  of  the  said  title,  shall  be  deemed  to  apply  to 
the  proceedings  herein  directed,  so  far  as  the  same  are  not  incon- 
sistent with  the  provisions  of  this  act ; and  the  officers  and  assignees 
performing  any  duties  under  this  act,  shall  be  entitled  for  their  ser- 
vices, to  the  same  fees  and  compensation  as  are  provided  by  law, 
for  similar  services  under  the  fifth  article  of  the  aforesaid  title  of 
chapter  five,  and  as  are  provided  by  law  for  services  in  criminal 
cases. 

Sec.  20.  Every  person  imprisoned  on  civil  process,  at  the  time 
of  this  act  taking  effect  as  a law,  in  any  case  where,  by  the  preceding 
provisions  of  this  act,  such  person  could  not  be  arrested,  or  impri- 
soned, shall  be  entitled  to  be  discharged  at  the  expiration  of  three 
months  after  this  act  shall  take  effect  as  a law,  unless  the  creditor 
of  whose  suit  such  person  shall  be  imprisoned,  shall,  within  the 
time  aforesaid,  make  application  and  complaint  to  some  judge  of 
the  court  in  which  such  suit  was  brought,  or  to  some  officer  author- 
ized to  perform  the  duties  of  such  judge,  as  specified  in  the  third 
and  fourth  sections  of  this  act;  and  upon  such  application  being 
made,  if  a warrant  is  not  issued  as  herein  provided,  such  imprisoned 
person  shall  be  entitled  to  be  discharged  from  imprisonment;  and 
if  such  warrant  be  granted,  the  same  proceeding  shall  be  had  thereon, 
as  herein  before  provided;  and  the  removal  of  the  defendant  from 
any  jail  in  which  he  may  be  imprisoned  by  any  warrant  in  such  pro- 
ceedings, shall  not  be  deemed  an  escape. 

Sec.  21.  Every  person  imprisoned,  as  in  the  last  preceding  sec- 
tion specified,  may  give  a notice  to  the  creditors  at  whose  suit  he  is 
imprisoned,  and  present  a petition  and  inventory,  as  specified  in  the 
twelfth  and  thirteenth  sections  of  this  act;  and  the  same  proceed- 
ings shall  be  thereon  as  herein  before  provided,  and  a discharge 
granted  on  such  petition  as  therein  directed,  shall  entitle  such  peti- 
tioner to  be  discharged  from  his  imprisonment. 


60 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


Sec.  22.  Whenever  any  complaint  shall  be  made  under  the  third, 
fourth  and  fifth  sections  of  this  act,  and  the  same  shall  be  dismissed, 
the  party  making  the  same  shall  be  liable  for  all  fees  to  officers,  and 
for  all  costs  and  expenses  which  the  defendant  shall  have  incurred. 

Sec.  23.  Whenever  in  this  act,  the  removal,  concealment  or  dis- 
posal of  any  property  is  declared  to  be  the  ground  of  any  complaint 
or  proceeding,  and  where  any  bond  is  required  in  reference  to  such 
concealment,  removal  or  disposal,  the  same  shall  not  be  deemed  to 
apply  to  any  property  which  shall  be  expressly  exempted  by  statute 
from  levy  and  sale  under  execution. 

Sec.  24.  Whenever  a bond,  given  under  the  tenth  section  of  this 
act,  shall  become  forfeited  by  the  non-performance  of  the  condition 
thereof,  the  plaintiff  shall  be  entitled  to  recover  thereon  the  amount 
due  to  him,  on  the  judgment  obtained  in  the  original  suit  instituted 
against  the  defendant  giving  such  a bond. 

Sec.  25.  The  foregoing  provisions  of  this  act  shall  not  extend 
to  suits  or  proceedings  before  justices’  or  other  courts,  for  the  recov- 
ery of  any  debt  or  demand  of  fifty  dollars  or  less. 

Sec.  26.  Any  person  who  shall  remove  any  of  his  property  out 
of  any  county,  with  intent  to  prevent  the  same  from  being  levied 
upon  by  any  execution,  or  who  shall  secrete,  assign,  convey,  or 
otherwise  dispose  of  any  of  his  property,  with  intent  to  defraud  any 
creditor,  or  to  prevent  such  property  being  made  liable  for  the  pay- 
ment of  his  debts,  and  any  person  who  shall  receive  such  property 
with  such  intent,  shall,  on  conviction,  be  deemed  guilty  of  a mis- 
demeanor; and  where  the  property  so  removed,  secreted,  concealed, 
assigned,  conveyed,  received  or  otherwise  disposed  of,  shall  be  worth 
fifty  dollars  or  less,  such  offence  may  be  tried  by  a court  of  special 
sessions  of  the  peace  in  the  manner  directed  in  the  third  title  of 
chapter  second  of  the  fourth  part  of  the  Revised  Statutes,  and  in 
such  case,  the  punishment  for  such  offence  shall  be  limited  as  pre- 
scribed in  the  said  title. 

Sec.  27.  Whenever  any  person  shall  have  been  convicted  of  a 
misdemeanor  under  the  last  preceding  section  of  this  act,  the  same 
proceedings  may  be  had  for  the  appointment  of  trustees  to  take 
charge  of  the  estate  of  such  person  as  are  authorized  by  the  second 
article  of  the  first  title  of  chapter  five  of  the  second  part  of  the 
Revised  Statutes;  and  the  trustees  so  appointed  shall  possess  all 
the  powers,  rights,  and  authority,  be  entitled  to  the  same  compensa- 
tion and  be  subject  to  the  same  duties,  obligations  and  control,  in 
all  respects,  as  trustees  appointed  under  the  said  second  article;  and 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


61 


in  addition  thereto,  if  such  trustees  suspect  that  the  person  so  con- 
victed has  concealed  about  his  person  or  otherwise,  money  or  evi- 
dences of  debt,  upon  making  oath  of  the  same  before  any  judge  of 
a county  court,  and  on  such  judge  being  satisfied  that  such  sus- 
picions are  well  founded,  he  may  issue  a warrant  authorizing  and 
commanding  any  sheriff  or  constable  to  search  the  person  of  such 
defendant,  and  any  place  occupied  by  him,  or  any  trunk  or  other 
article  owned  or  possessed  by  him,  for  such  money  or  evidences, 
and  to  deliver  what  shall  be  so  discovered  to  such  trustees. 

Sec.  28.  When  it  shall  appear  to  any  officer  authorized  to  enter- 
tain any  proceedings  under  this  act,  that  any  misdemeanor  or  per- 
jury has  been  committed  by  any  party  or  witness,  it  shall  be  his 
duty  to  take  the  measures  prescribed  by  law  to  cause  the  offender 
to  appear  at  the  proper  court  having  jurisdiction  of  the  offence,  to 
answer  for  the  same. 

Sec.  29.  No  person  shall  be  excused  from  answering  any  bill 
in  equity,  seeking  a discovery  in  relation  to  any  fraud  prohibited  by 
this  act,  or  from  answering  as  a witness  in  relation  to  any  such 
fraud;  but  no  such  answer  shall  be  used  in  evidence  in  any  other 
suit  or  prosecution. 

Sec.  30.  No  execution  issued  on  any  judgment  rendered  by  any 
justice  of  the  peace  upon  any  demand  arising  upon  contract,  express 
or  implied,  or  upon  any  other  judgment  founded  upon  contract, 
whether  issued  by  such  justice  or  by  the  clerk  of  the  county,  shall 
contain  a clause  authorizing  an  arrest  or  imprisonment  of  the  person 
against  whom  the  same  shall  issue,  unless  it  shall  be  proved,  by  the 
affidavit  of  the  person  in  whose  favor  such  execution  shall  issue, 
or  that  of  some  other  person,  to  the  satisfaction  of  such  clerk  or 
justice,  either, 

1.  That  the  person  against  whom  the  same  shall  issue,  had  not 
resided  in  this  State  for  the  space  of  thirty  days  immediately  pre- 
ceding the  commencement  of  the  suit  upon  which  such  judgment 
was  rendered,  or  immediately  preceding  the  rendition  of  such  judg- 
ment, if  the  same  was  rendered  upon  confession  without  process ; or, 

2.  That  such  judgment  was  for  the  recovery  of  money  col- 
lected by  any  public  officer;  or, 

3.  For  official  misconduct  or  neglect  of  duty;  or, 

4.  For  damages  for  misconduct  or  neglect  in  any  professional 
employment. 

Sec.  31.  No  warrant  shall  issue  against  a defendant  in  any  case 
in  which,  by  the  provisions  of  the  last  preceding  section,  an  execu- 


62 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


tion  on  the  judgment  recovered,  could  not  be  issued  against  his 
body,  and  whenever  a warrant  in  such  case  shall  issue,  the  like  affi- 
davit shall  be  required  as  for  the  issuing  of  an  execution  by  the 
provisions  of  said  section. 

Sec.  32.  Whenever  by  the  provisions  of  the  last  preceding  sec- 
tion no  warrant  can  issue,  and  the  plaintiff  shall  be  a non-resident 
of  the  county,  and  shall  give  the  like  proof  of  the  fact,  and  tender 
to  the  justice  the  security  now  required  by  law  to  entitle  him  to  a 
warrant,  the  justice  shall  issue  a summons,  which  may  be  made 
returnable  not  less  than  two  nor  more  than  four  days  from  the 
date  thereof,  and  shall  be  served  at  least  two  days  before  the  time 
of  appearance  mentioned  therein;  and  if  the  same  shall  be  returned 
personally  served,  the  same  proceedings  shall  be  had,  and  no  longer 
adjournment  granted,  than  in  case  of  a warrant  at  the  instance  of 
a non-resident  plaintiff. 

Sec.  33.  Whenever  by  the  provisions  of  the  thirtieth  section  of 
this  act,  no  warrant  can  issue,  and  the  defendants  shall  reside  out  of 
the  county,  he  shall  be  proceeded  against  by  summons  or  attachment, 
returnable  not  less  than  two,  nor  more  than  four  days  from  the 
date  thereof,  which  shall  be  served  at  least  two  days  from  the  date 
thereof,  which  shall  be  served  at  least  two  days  before  the  time  of 
appearance  mentioned  therein;  and  if  such  defendant  be  proceeded 
against  otherwise,  the  justice  shall  have  no  jurisdiction  of  the  cause. 

Sec.  34.  In  addition  to  the  cases  in  which  suits  may  now  be  com- 
menced before  justices  of  the  peace  by  attachment,  any  suit  for  the 
recovery  of  any  debt  or  damages  arising  upon  any  contract,  express 
or  implied,  or  upon  any  judgment,  for  fifty  dollars  or  less,  may  be 
so  commenced,  whenever  it  shall  satisfactorily  appear  to  such  jus- 
tice that  the  defendant  is  about  to  remove  from  the  county  any  of 
his  property,  with  intent  to  defraud  his  creditors,  or  has  assigned, 
disposed  of  or  secreted,  or  is  about  to  assign,  dispose  of  or  secrete 
any  of  his  property,  with  the  like  intent,  whether  such  defendant  be 
a resident  of  this  state  or  not. 

Sec.  35.  Before  any  attachment  shall  issue  in  such  case,  or  in  the 
cases  provided  for  in  article  second,  title  fourth,  chapter  second, 
part  third  of  the  Revised  Statutes,  the  plaintiff  shall  by  his  own 
affidavit,  or  that  of  some  other  person  or  persons,  prove  to  the  satis- 
faction of  the  justice,  the  facts  and  circumstances  to  entitle  him 
to  the  same,  and  that  he  has  such  a claim  as  is  specified  in  the  last 
preceding  section  against  the  defendant,  over  and  above  all  dis- 
counts which  the  defendant  may  have  against  him,  specifying,  as 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY . 


63 


near  as  may  be,  the  amount  of  such  claim  or  the  balance  thereof; 
and  such  plaintiff,  or  some  one  in  his  behalf,  shall  also  execute  in 
the  cases  provided  for  by  this  act,  a bond  in  the  penalty  of  at  least 
one  hundred  dollars,  with  such  sureties,  and  upon  such  condition 
as  is  required  in  section  twenty-ninth  of  said  article;  and  so  much 
of  said  article  as  requires  any  other  or  different  proof  for  the  issu- 
ing of  an  attachment,  than  that  required  by  this  section,  is  hereby 
repealed. 

Sec.  36.  Every  attachment  issued  by  virtue  of  this  act,  or  of  the 
provisions  contained  in  the  said  second  article,  shall  be  served  in 
the  manner  now  provided  in  said  article,  except  that  if  the  defendant 
can  be  found  in  the  county,  the  copy  of  such  attachment  and  inven- 
tory, shall  be  served  upon  him  personally  instead  of  leaving  the  same 
at  the  place  now  prescribed  in  said  article:  and  the  return  of  said 
officer,  in  addition  to  what  is  now  required,  shall  state  specifically 
whether  such  copy  was  or  was  not  personally  served  upon  the 
defendant. 

Sec.  37.  If  such  attachment  was  issued  in  one  of  the  cases  pro- 
vided for  by  this  act,  and  shall  be  returned  personally  served  upon 
the  defendant,  the  justice  shall,  on  the  return  day,  proceed  to  hear 
and  determine  the  cause  in  the  same  manner  as  upon  a summons 
returned  personally  served. 

Sec.  38.  If  such  attachment  was  issued  in  one  of  the  cases  pro- 
vided for  by  this  act,  and  at  the  return  day  it  shall  appear  by  the 
return,  that  property  was  attached,  and  that  a copy  of  such  inventory 
and  attachment  was  not  personally  served,  and  the  defendant  shall 
not  appear,  the  plaintiff  may  take  out  a summons  against  the  defend- 
ant; and  if  such  summons  shall  be  returned  that  the  defendant  can- 
not be  found  after  diligent  inquiry,  or  that  the  same  has  been  per- 
sonally served  upon  the  defendant,  in  either  case,  the  justice  shall 
proceed  to  hear  and  determine  the  cause  in  the  same  manner  as 
upon  a summons  returned  personally  served. 

Sec.  39.  A judgment  obtained  before  any  justice,  in  any  suit 
commenced  by  attachment,  when  the  defendant  shall  not  be  per- 
sonally served  with  the  attachment  or  summons,  and  shall  not  appear, 
shall  be  only  presumptive  evidence  of  indebtedness,  in  any  suit  that 
may  be  brought  thereon,  and  may  be  repelled  by  the  defendant ; and 
no  execution  issued  upon  such  judgment,  shall  be  levied  upon  any 
other  property  than  such  as  was  seized  under  the  attachment  issued 
thereon ; nor  shall  any  defendant  in  such  case,  be  barred  of  any  set- 
off which  he  may  have  against  the  plaintiff. 


64 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


Sec.  40.  A defendant,  against  whose  body,  by  the  provisions  of 
this  act,  an  execution  cannot  be  issued  from  a justice’s  court,  shall 
not  be  required,  in  order  to  obtain  an  adjournment  of  a cause,  to 
give  a bond  with  the  condition  now  required  by  law,  but  instead 
thereof,  the  condition  of  such  bond  shall  be,  that  no  part  of  his 
property  liable  to  be  taken  on  execution  shall  be  removed,  secreted, 
assigned,  or  in  any  way  disposed  of,  except  the  necessary  support 
of  himself  and  family,  until  the  plaintiff’s  demand  shall  be  satisfied, 
or  until  the  expiration  of  ten  days  after  such  plaintiff  shall  be  entitled 
to  have  an  execution  issued  on  the  judgment  obtained  in  such  cause, 
if  he  shall  obtain  such  judgment,  and  if  the  condition  of  such  bond 
be  broken,  and  an  execution  of  such  judgment  be  returned  unsatis- 
fied in  whole  or  in  part,  the  plaintiff,  in  an  action  on  such  bond, 
shall  be  entitled  to  recover  the  amount  due  on  such  judgment. 

Sec.  41.  Sections  one  hundred  and  thirty-seven,  one  hundred  and 
thirty-eight  and  one  hundred  and  thirty-nine  of  title  fourth,  chapter 
second  and  part  third  of  the  Revised  Statutes  are  hereby  repealed. 

Sec.  42.  When  judgment  shall  be  rendered  against  the  defendant, 
no  more  than  two  summonses,  and  the  service  of  the  two  sum- 
monses, shall  be  included  in  the  costs  of  such  judgment. 

Sec.  43.  All  the  provisions  of  said  title  fourth,  not  hereby 
expressly  repealed,  and  not  consistent  with  the  provisions  of  this 
act,  are  hereby  declared  to  be  in  full  force,  and  to  apply  to  the  pro- 
visions of  this  act,  so  far  as  the  same  relate  to  proceedings  in  courts 
before  justices  of  the  peace. 

Sec.  44.  All  persons  imprisoned  at  the  time  this  act  shall  take 
effect  as  a law,  by  virtue  of  any  execution  issued  upon  a judgment 
recovered  before  any  justice,  upon  any  contract,  express  or  implied, 
shall  be  discharged  from  such  imprisonment,  as  in  the  next  section 
provided,  unless  the  plaintiff  in  such  execution  shall,  on  or  before 
that  day,  file  with  the  jailer  an  affidavit,  stating  such  facts  as  would 
authorize  an  execution  against  the  body  of  the  defendant,  according 
to  the  twenty-ninth  section  of  this  act. 

Sec.  45.  To  entitle  such  imprisoned  debtor  to  such  discharge, 
he  shall  present  to  the  jailer  or  sheriff  in  whose  custody  he  shall 
be,  an  affidavit  setting  forth  that  the  execution,  by  virtue  of  which 
he  is  imprisoned,  issued  upon  a judgment  obtained  on  a contract, 
express  or  implied,  or  obtained  on  a judgment  founded  on  such 
contract;  and  thereupon  he  shall  be  discharged,  and  the  sheriff  shall 
not  be  liable  to  any  action  for  such  discharge. 


AS  MEMBER  OF  ASSEMBLY. 


65 


Sec.  46.  Any  person  imprisoned  on  any  process  issued  out  of 
any  court,  who  shall  be  entitled  to  be  discharged  from  such  impris- 
onment under  the  provisions  of  this  act,  may  bring  a writ  of  habeas 
corpus  or  certiorari  for  that  purpose,  in  the  manner  provided  in  the 
ninth  chapter  of  the  third  part  of  the  Revised  Statutes. 

Sec.  47.  The  provisions  of  this  act,  from  the  twenty-ninth  section 
inclusive,  shall  apply  to  executions,  warrants  and  other  process 
issued  by  the  marine  court  in  the  city  of  New  York,  by  the  assistant 
justices  for  wards  in  the  said  city,  and  by  the  justices  of  the  justices’ 
courts  in  the  city  of  Albany  and  of  the  city  of  Hudson,  and  to  all 
proceedings  in  the  said  courts  and  by  the  said  justices,  in  the  like 
cases  and  in  the  same  manner  as  herein  provided  in  respect  to  jus- 
tices of  the  peace. 

Sec.  48.  This  act  shall  take  effect  as  a law  on  the  first  day  of 
March,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty-two;  but  the  secretary 
of  state  shall  immediately  cause  a sufficient  number  of  copies  of  this 
act  to  be  printed  by  the  state  printer,  to  supply  every  justice  of  the 
peace  in  the  state,  and  every  town  clerk  and  sheriff  with  a copy, 
which  shall  be  transmitted  by  him  to  the  clerks  of  the  different 
counties,  and  by  them  distributed  to  the  officers  entitled  thereto : 
the  expense  of  which  printing  and  transmission  to  the  county  clerks 
shall  be  paid  out  of  the  treasury,  in  the  manner  provided  by  law. 


MR.  FILLMORE’S  PAMPHLET 

ON  RELIGIOUS  TESTS 


FOR  WITNESSES 


MR.  FILLMORE  AS  PAMPHLETEER 


In  the  autumn  of  1832  there  appeared  in  the  Buffalo 
Patriot  a series  of  letters,  afterwards  issued  as  a sixteen- 
page  pamphlet  with  the  following  title-page : “An  examina- 
tion of  the  question,  “Is  it  right  to  require  any  religious  test 
as  a qualification  to  be  a witness  in  a court  of  justice?’  By 
Juridicus.  Buffalo:  Printed  by  Charles  Faxon.  1832.” 
Whether  the  authorship  of  this  pamphlet  was  generally 
known  at  the  time,  cannot  now  be  stated;  but  on  the  title- 
page  of  a copy  which  was  for  many  years  in  Mr.  Fillmore’s 
library,  and  is  now  owned  by  the  Buffalo  Historical  Society, 
is  written,  in  Mr.  Fillmore’s  well-known  hand,  “By  Millard 
Fillmore.”  He  was  not  the  man  to  thus  claim  a work  unless 
he  was  its  author.  Furthermore,  the  style  of  composition 
is  such  as  to  remove  all  doubt  from  a mind  familiar  with 
the  characteristics  of  his  writing.  Chronologically,  it  stands 
between  his  service  in  the  Assembly  of  New  York  State, 
and  the  national  House  of  Representatives.  The  text  of  the 
pamphlet,  with  the  title-page  in  facsimile,  follow. 


68 


AN 

OF  THE 

‘IS  IT  RIGHT  TO  REQUIRE 

ANY  RELIGIOUS  TEST 

AS  A 

^&&ai3*a®4iiaa<s>&r 

TO  BE  A 

WITNESS  IN  A COURT  OF  JUSTICE?' 
BY  JURIDTCUS. 

Buffalo : 

PRINTED  BY  CHARLES  FAXON. 

1832. 


69 


PREFACE 


The  following  numbers  appeared  in  the  Buffalo  Patriot  during  the 
winter  of  1832,  over  the  signature  of  JURIDICUS.  They  treat  upon 
a subject  of  vital  importance  to  every  citizen.  Many,  whose  char- 
acter and  religious  faith  are  a sure  guaranty,  not  only  to  their  com- 
petency but  credibility  as  witnesses,  suppose  they  have  no  interest  in 
a rule  of  law  that  prevents  their  neighbor  from  testifying.  But  in 
this  they  are  entirely  mistaken.  It  is  their  interest  as  well  as  the 
civil  rights  of  their  neighbor,  that  suffer  by  this  unjust  rule.  They 
have  an  interest  in  their  neighbor’s  testimony, — he  may  be  the  only 
witness  by  whose  evidence  a right  can  be  established,  or  an  unjust 
claim  repelled.  And  if  any  improper  rule  of  law  prevents  his  testify- 
ing, an  innocent  person  may  suffer  for  want  of  his  evidence,  and 
justice  be  defeated.  It  may  be  truly  said  that  in  all  moral  revolu- 
tions, public  sentiment  must  precede  legislative  action.  The  repre- 
sentative is  seldom  in  advance  of  his  constituents.  If  you  would 
therefore  successfully  attack  ancient  prejudices,  or  overturn  long 
established  errors,  enlighten  the  people,  and  the  work  is  accom- 
plished. These  considerations  are  thought  to  be  a sufficient  apology 
for  re-printing  the  following  numbers,  and  distributing  them  to  the 
world  in  a more  extensive  and  substantial  manner  than  the  limited 
circulation  and  evanescent  nature  of  a country  newspaper  would 
permit.  They  are  brief,  considering  the  extent  of  the  subject  upon 
which  they  treat,  yet  it  is  believed  they  are  sufficiently  long  for  the 
man  who  thinks,  and  more  would  be  thrown  away  upon  the  reader 
who  never  thinks.  The  absurdities  mentioned  will  suggest  more  to 
the  reflecting  mind,  and  if  many  more  were  added,  they  would  weigh 
nothing  in  the  mind  of  that  man  who  never  reflects. 

It  is  proper  to  add  in  conclusion,  that  in  the  winter  of  1831,  a bill 
was  introduced  into  the  assembly  of  the  State  of  New  York  for  the 
purpose  of  amending  the  law  in  this  respect,  a copy  of  which  is 
annexed.  Its  friends  had  strong  hopes  of  its  passage,  but  the  press 
of  other  important  business  which  had  a preference,  prevented  any 
action  upon  it  during  that  session ; and  the  subject  was  not  resumed 
the  ensuing  year. 

Buffalo,  October  5th,  1832. 


70 


IN  ASSEMBLY, February  i,  1832. 


An  act  relative  to  the  competency  of  witnesses. 

The  People  of  the  State  of  New  York,  represented  in  Senate  and 
Assembly  do  enact  as  follows: 

§ 1.  No  person  shall  be  deemed  incompetent  as  a witness  in  any 
court,  matter  or  proceeding,  on  account  of  his  or  her  religious  belief, 
or  for  the  want  of  any  religious  belief ; nor  shall  any  witness  be  ques- 
tioned as  to  his  or  her  religious  belief ; nor  shall  any  other  testimony 
be  received  in  relation  thereto,  either  before  or  after  such  witness 
may  be  sworn. 

No.  1. 

Mr.  Salisbury1 — I ask  the  favor  of  your  columns  to  discuss  a 
question  of  great  importance,  to  the  rights  of  every  citizen.  And 
when  I speak  of  rights  I mean  those  legal  and  admitted  rights  that 
the  constitution  and  laws  profess  to  guaranty  to  every  person.  The 
question  is  this,  “Is  it  right  to  require  any  religious  test  to  qualify 
a person  to  be  a witness  in  a court  of  justice?” 

It  may  appear  like  presumption  in  any  person  to  assume  the  nega- 
tive of  this  question.  He  will  undoubtedly  be  told,  that  the  wisdom 
of  ages  has  sanctioned  the  doctrine,  that  if  a person  be  deficient  in 
certain  articles  of  established  faith  he  ought  not  to  be  permitted  to 
be  sworn  in  a court  of  justice;  that  no  testimony  ought  to  be  given 
without  the  sanction  of  an  oath ; that  the  oath  itself  in  such  case 
would  be  but  a mockery,  and  therefore,  the  witness  ought  not  to  be 
heard  at  all. 

All  will  readily  admit  that  it  is  of  infinite  importance  to  the 
due  administration  of  justice,  that  the  rule  by  which  testimony  is  to 
be  admitted  or  rejected,  should  be  the  one  best  calculated  to  develop 
the  facts  which  are  necessary  to  be  known,  to  arrive  at  a correct  de- 
cision of  the  matter  in  controversy. 

1.  Hezekiah  A.  Salisbury,  publisher  of  the  Buffalo  Patriot.  He  and  his 
brother  Smith  H.  Salisbury  were  the  pioneer  printers  of  Buffalo.  In  1832  the 
Patriot  was  a weekly.  January  7,  1834,  it  was  renamed  the  Buffalo  Patriot 
and  Commercial  Advertiser.  The  first  number  of  the  daily  Commercial  Adver- 
tiser was  issued  Jan.  1,  1835,  with  H.  A.  Salisbury  as  publisher.  He  died 
March  14,  1856. 


7i 


72 


THE  PAMPHLET  OF  “JURIDICUS.” 


The  best  and  most  perfect  laws  are  but  a dead  letter,  if  there  be 
no  adequate  means  provided  to  obtain  a knowledge  of  the  facts  upon 
which  they  are  to  operate.  How  does  it  benefit  me,  though  the  law 
has  declared  that  the  man  who  takes  my  horse  shall  pay  me  all  the 
damage  which  I may  sustain  by  such  taking,  if,  at  the  same  time,  it 
has  provided  no  means  by  which  I can  satisfy  the  tribunal  appointed 
to  administer  justice,  that  the  horse  has  been  taken  and  I have  sus- 
tained damage?  Injustice  must  always  be  done,  when  for  any  cause, 
the  true  facts  can  not  be  brought  to  light.  Evidence  is  the  medium 
through  which  justice  is  always  to  be  administered — and  if  by  adopt- 
ing an  improper  rule  we  exclude  from  our  knowledge  a part,  or  all 
of  the  facts,  which  are  necessary  to  be  known  to  decide  correctly,  we 
must  in  our  decision  necessarily  and  unavoidably  do  injustice. 

The  rule  of  exclusion  in  the  dark  ages  when  men  were  punished 
for  “opinion’s  sake,”  was  very  broad  indeed.  Gilbert  lays  it  down 
generally,  “That  infidels  can  not  be  witnesses,  because  they  are  under 
none  of  the  obligations  of  OUR  religion.” 

In  1744,  the  Chancellor  of  England,  assisted  by  the  Chief  Justice 
of  the  King’s  Bench  and  Chief  Baron  of  the  Common  Pleas,  decided 
in  a case  originating  in  India  that  a Gentoo  might  be  sworn  accord- 
ing to  the  forms  of  his  own  religion,  and  was  a good  witness.  This 
was  the  first  indication  of  returning  sanity  in  the  judicial  tribunals 
of  England,  and  the  first  step  towards  the  adoption  of  the  true  rule 
for  admitting  or  rejecting  witnesses  for  religious  belief.  This  inno- 
vation was  strongly  opposed ; and  nothing  more  appears  to  have  been 
done  by  the  courts  of  that  country  till  after  our  revolution,  when  by 
the  constitution  of  this  State,  we  adopted  the  laws  of  Great  Britain, 
and  took  the  law  on  this  subject  as  it  then  stood. 

No  reported  decision  was  made  in  our  courts  on  this  subject  until 
1820,  when  the  question  was  raised  as  to  a witness  who  had  declared 
his  disbelief  in  a Deity,  and  a future  state  of  rewards  and  punish- 
ments. He  was  declared  to  be  incompetent,  and  Chief  Justice 
Spencer,  who  delivered  the  opinion  of  the  court,  said,  “By  the  law  of 
England  which  has  been  adopted  in  this  State,  it  is  fully  and  clearly 
settled,  that  infidels  who  do  not  believe  in  a God,  or  if  they  do,  do 
not  think  that  he  will  either  reward  or  punish  them  in  the  world  to 
come,  can  not  be  witnesses  in  any  case,  nor  under  any  circumstances, 
because  an  oath  cannot  possibly  be  any  tie  or  obligation  upon  them.” 
— 18  Johnson’s  Rep.,  103. 

By  this  decision  it  would  appear,  that  to  render  a man  a com- 
petent witness,  it  is  not  only  necessary  that  he  should  believe  in  a 
God,  but  also  in  a future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments.  This 
would  exclude  most  of  that  class  of  Christians  called  Universalists 


THE  PAMPHLET  OF  “JURIDICUS.” 


73 


from  the  right  to  testify.  In  1823,  this  authority  was  questioned  by 
Mr.  Justice  Sutherland,  in  delivering  the  opinion  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  and  he  decided  the  true  test  to  be  “whether  the  witness  be- 
lieves in  a God,  who  will  punish  him  if  he  swears  falsely.” — 2 Cow- 
en’s  Rep.,  432.  Within  this  rule,  that  class  of  Universalists  who  be- 
lieve that  the  Supreme  Being  will  punish  them  in  this  world  for 
false  swearing  would  be  competent  witnesses. 

In  1824,  the  question  again  arose  before  the  present  Chancellor 
of  the  State  then  acting  as  one  of  our  Circuit  Judges,  on  the  trial  of 
a criminal  in  Otsego  county.  A witness  was  objected  to  on  the 
ground  “that  he  did  not  believe  in  any  future  punishment  after  this 
life.”  The  judge  decided,  that  the  witness  was  competent  and  might 
be  sworn ; and  that  the  true  test  was,  that  he  should  believe  in  a God 
who  would  punish  him  either  in  this  world,  or  the  world  to  come,  if 
he  testified  falsely. — 2 Cow.  Rep.,  p.  432,  note  a. 

This  last  rule  as  laid  down  by  Judge  Walworth,  was  recom- 
mended by  the  Revisers  and  adopted  by  the  Legislature  as  a part  of 
the  Revised  Statutes  of  this  State,  in  the  following  words : 

“Every  person  believing  in  the  existence  of  a Supreme  Being  who 
will  punish  false  swearing,  shall  be  admitted  to  be  sworn,  if  other- 
wise competent.” — 2 Revised  Statutes,  p.  408,  § 87. 

This  is  now  the  existing  law  on  this  subject,  with  a brief  history 
of  its  mutations  from  time  to  time;  and  it  is  not  a little  remarkable 
that  every  change  has  been  in  favor  of  admitting  persons  to  testify 
who  were  before  excluded.  The  narrow  feeling  of  prejudice  and 
bigotry  have  gradually  given  way  to  more  enlightened  and  liberal 
views.  And  since  the  doctrine  has  received  the  assent  of  all  in- 
telligent minds,  that  men  do  not  deserve  to  be  punished  on  account 
of  the  peculiarity  of  their  religious  faith,  it  is  strange  that  they  con- 
tinue to  deprive  themselves  of  the  benefit  of  their  neighbor’s  testi- 
mony, merely  because  his  faith  in  certain  unknown  things,  is  a little 
weaker  or  stronger  than  theirs. 

In  my  next  number  I shall  consider  the  objection,  that  an  infidel 
ought  not  to  be  sworn  because  there  is  no  tie  upon  his  conscience. 

No.  2. 

In  my  last  number,  I proposed  in  this  “to  consider  the  objection 
that  an  infidel  ought  not  to  be  sworn  because  there  is  no  tie  upon 
his  conscience.”  Technically  speaking,  a witness  is  said  to  be  incom- 
petent, who  is  not  permitted  to  be  sworn  or  to  testify;  and  to  be 
incredible  when,  from  any  cause,  his  testimony,  though  received,  is 
not  entitled  to  belief. 


74 


THE  PAMPHLET  OF  “JURIDICUS.” 


A child  too  young  to  understand  the  nature  of  an  oath,  is  said  to 
be  incompetent.  He  can  not  be  allowed  to  testify  at  all.  A man 
who  is  a notorious  liar,  may  not  be  competent — he  may  be  sworn; 
but  nevertheless  from  his  infamy  of  character,  he  may  not  be  en- 
titled to  belief,  and  he  is,  in  such  case,  said  to  be  competent,  but  not 
credible. 

The  question  therefore  is,  “should  a witness  be  deemed  incom- 
petent on  account  of  his  infidelity  ?” 

I shall  not  now  stop  to  inquire  whether  the  term  infidel  includes 
all  who  do  not  possess  the  true  faith  or  not.  My  object  is  not  a 
justification  of  the  belief  or  want  of  belief,  of  infidels  in  general,  or 
any  particular  class  of  them,  but  to  ascertain,  if  possible,  whether 
their  errors  of  opinion  in  matters  of  belief,  should  disfranchise  them 
from  the  protection  of  our  laws,  and  deprive  others  of  the  benefit  of 
their  testimony. 

I shall  therefore  take  the  strongest  possible  case  of  infidelity,  that 
does  or  can  exist,  that  of  the  atheist,  and  if  I am  able  to  prove,  that, 
even  in  this  case,  the  due  and  just  administration  of  the  laws  would 
be  promoted  by  permitting  his  erroneous  belief  to  go  to  his  credibil- 
ity instead  of  his  incompetency,  it  is  presumed  that  no  other  shade  of 
infidelity  will  be  deemed  sufficient  to  render  a witness  incompetent. 

But  why  is  the  atheist  incompetent?  Because,  say  the  courts, 
there  is  no  tie  upon  his  conscience.  But  this  is  not  true  in  point  of 
fact : there  are  many  ties,  and  many  inducements,  and  many  motives 
yet  to  speak  the  truth,  when  under  oath,  though  he  may  and  does 
lack  one  which  operates  upon  the  person  who  believes  that  he  will  be 
punished  in  the  world  to  come  for  false  swearing.  The  belief  or  dis- 
belief of  the  existence  of  a Supreme  Being  or  of  the  divinity  of  our 
Saviour,  proves  neither  integrity  nor  the  want  of  it.  Men  believe  in 
proportion  to  the  evidence  which  they  have,  or  suppose  they  have. 
Their  culpability,  if  any,  lies  not  in  the  belief  or  disbelief,  of  the 
existence  of  an  over-ruling  Providence,  but  in  their  neglect  to  search 
out  such  evidences  of  the  fact  within  their  reach,  as  shall  satisfy  them 
of  such  existence.  There  can  be  no  other  merit  or  demerit,  in  believ- 
ing or  disbelieving.  If  it  were  in  the  power  of  men  to  believe  accord- 
ing to  desire,  who  would  indulge  for  a moment  the  melancholy  reflec- 
tion, when  surrounded  by  friends,  and  in  the  full  enjoyment  of 
youth,  health  and  happiness,  that  soon,  very  soon,  the  unsparing 
scythe  of  time,  would  lay  these  beloved  associates,  one  by  one,  in  the 
solitary  grave ; that  the  buoyancy  and  delights  of  youth,  must  soon  be 
damped  and  chilled  by  the  autumn  and  winter  of  old  age,  and  the  tide 
of  health  and  joy  that  now  pours  around  the  heart,  must  soon  be 
clogged  by  disease,  and  become  the  stagnant  pool,  whose  exhalations 


THE  PAMPHLET  OF  “JURID1CUS.” 


75 


produce  pain,  misery  and  death?  I ask  who  would  believe  these 
things,  if  belief  were  a matter  of  choice?  and  I answer  none.  Yet 
all  do  believe  them.  The  virtuous  and  the  vicious — the  honest  and 
the  dishonest;  and  why  do  they  believe?  Not  certainly  because  they 
are  virtuous  or  vicious,  honest  or  dishonest,  but  because  the  evidences 
that  constantly  force  themselves  upon  our  notice  and  observation  are 
such,  that  we  can  not  avoid  the  conclusion  that  this  must  inevitably 
be  the  result,  and  from  these  evidences,  in  regard  to  this  matter,  our 
faith  and  our  belief  is  fixed.  So  that  a man’s  belief  or  disbelief  of  a 
particular  fact,  in  no  wise  depends  upon  his  character  for  moral 
honesty,  or  truth,  but  his  character  for  truth  does,  in  some  measure, 
depend  upon  his  belief  or  disbelief  of  the  certainty  of  punishment  if 
he  shall  tell  a falsehood.  And  this  is,  in  some  measure,  the  view 
which  the  courts  of  modern  times  have  taken  of  this  subject.  They 
have  not  made  the  competency  or  credibility  of  the  witness  depend 
upon  the  correctness  or  fallacy  of  the  witness’  belief.  The  pagan 
who  believes  that  his  little  wooden  god  which  he  carries  in  his  bosom, 
will  punish  him  in  the  world  to  come  for  false-swearing,  is,  so  far  as 
a matter  of  faith  is  concerned,  just  as  good  a witness  as  the  most 
devout  Christian.  So  far  as  the  fear  of  punishment  goes,  he  is 
equally  restrained  from  the  crime  of  perjury.  And  the  want  of  this 
belief  only  shows  that  one  inducement  out  of  a great  many  is  wanting 
to  insure  virtuous  conduct  and  moral  honesty. 

Now  should  the  want  of  this  one  inducement  to  speak  the  truth, 
render  him  incompetent  as  a witness?  So  far  as  the  fear  of  punish- 
ment to  be  inflicted  by  human  laws  can  operate  to  prevent  falsehood, 
this  fear  must  operate  upon  him  with  the  same  force  as  upon  the  most 
devout  believer.  The  dread  of  shame  and  infamy  that  necessarily 
attaches  to  the  man  who  gives  false  testimony,  has  the  same  influence 
upon  the  atheist  as  the  believer.  The  pride  of  character,  the  love  of 
justice,  that  sense  of  right  and  wrong  that  is  implanted  in  every 
human  breast,  all  operate  with  the  same  force  upon  the  atheist  as 
upon  any  other  individual.  Truth  is  much  more  easily  told  than 
falsehood.  The  relation  of  truth  requires  no  effort.  The  invention 
of  a falsehood  calculated  to  gain  credit  with  an  intelligent  jury,  is  an 
undertaking  of  great  labor  and  hazard.  Indolence  itself  is  a barrier 
against  wilful  false-swearing;  and  the  very  fear  of  detection  whilst 
on  the  stand,  in  the  presence  of  the  court  and  surrounding  audience, 
is  a strong  preventive  of  falsehood.  All  these  are  so  many  assur- 
ances and  so  many  guaranties  for  the  truth  of  the  testimony  of  every 
witness.  They  operate  equally  upon  the  believer  and  unbeliever, 
pagan  and  Christian,  Jew  and  Mahometan. 


76 


THE  PAMPHLET  OF  “JURIDICUS. 


Now  men  in  the  performance  of  every  voluntary  act  are  governed 
by  some  motive.  They  have  in  view  some  advantage,  real  or  im- 
aginary; and  whenever  the  motives  to  commit  perjury  in  the  opinion 
of  the  witness  outweigh  those  to  speak  the  truth,  he  will  testify 
falsely,  no  matter  how  strong  the  motives  in  favor  of  truth  may  be. 
The  preponderance  against  them  in  his  opinion  fixes  the  result. 
Therefore  all  the  restraints  which  can  be  imposed,  are  not  sufficient 
in  all  cases  to  prevent  perjury.  Yet,  in  a great  majority  of  cases, 
one-half  of  them  would  be  amply  sufficient.  The  bare  absence  of  a 
motive  to  swear  falsely  would  of  itself  be  a sufficient  guaranty  for 
truth.  The  fear  of  future  punishment  for  false  swearing  has  much 
less  influence  on  the  great  majority  of  people  than  may  be  at  first 
imagined.  No  specific  punishment  for  the  breach  of  an  official  oath 
is  prescribed  by  our  law.  Sheriffs,  judges,  justices,  constables,  and 
other  officers,  take  an  oath  faithfully  to  discharge  the  duties  of  their 
respective  offices.  A violation  of  this  oath  is  moral  perjury.  Yet  in 
the  great  majority  of  cases,  it  is  no  sooner  taken  than  forgotten.  It 
is  scarcely  thought  an  obligation.  It  is  taken  by  the  recipient  as  a 
mere  ceremony,  to  show  that  he  intends  to  enter  upon  the  duties  of 
his  office.  Custom  house  oaths  and  test  oaths  are  still  stronger  in- 
stances of  the  almost  perfect  indifference  with  which  false  swearing 
is  viewed,  when  there  is  no  other  penalty  than  the  punishment  to  be 
inflicted  by  the  Supreme  Being  for  false  swearing. 

When  all  these  instances  of  moral  perjury,  with  many  others  that 
might  be  enumerated  are  taken  into  view,  it  must  be  apparent,  that 
the  fear  of  future  punishment  is  in  fact  of  but  little  use  in  preventing 
perjury.  The  witness  who  makes  up  his  mind  to  commit  perjury 
views  it  as  too  remote  to  affect  him  much.  He  calculates  on  repent- 
ance and  forgiveness  before  he  dies;  and  it  is  but  a feeble  restraint. 
All  must  concede,  that  the  fear  of  future  punishment  with  the  great 
majority  of  witnesses,  is  not  half  as  powerful  to  prevent  perjury,  as 
the  fear  of  punishment  inflicted  by  human  laws.  If  so,  then  why 
should  the  witness  be  competent  when  the  fear  of  human  punishment 
is  removed,  and  incompetent  because  the  fear  of  future  punishment  is 
removed?  A witness  is  called  upon  the  stand  and  asked  if  any  other 
person  was  present  and  saw  the  fact  that  he  is  about  to  testify  to. 
He  replies,  no.  Then  of  course  if  the  witness  should  testify  falsely, 
there  could  be  no  evidence  by  which  he  could  be  convicted  of  perjury. 
He  therefore  testifies  without  the  fear  of  human  punishment  for  that 
offence.  This  powerful  inducement  to  speak  the  truth  is  wanting. 
Why  is  he  not  set  aside  as  incompetent?  Why  is  not  the  presump- 
tion immediately  raised  in  this  case,  as  in  the  other,  that  he  will 


THE  PAMPHLET  OF  “JURIDICUS.” 


77 


swear  falsely,  because  there  is  no  fear  of  human  punishment — no  tie 
upon  his  conscience?  Yet  this  is  never  done. 

But  again — we  want  the  testimony  of  a witness  in  our  courts  who 
lives  in  India,  or  Russia.  The  court  send  out  a commission  to  take 
the  testimony,  without  ever  inquiring  whether  that  government 
where  the  witness  resides,  has  made  any  provision  to  punish  the  wit- 
ness for  perjury,  or  false  swearing  in  a case  depending  in  our  own 
courts.  Why  should  we  not  presume  the  witness  will  commit  perjury 
on  account  of  this  restraint  being  removed,  and  therefore  declare  him 
incompetent.  He  knows  the  laws  of  Russia  where  he  resides  have 
made  no  provisions  for  punishing  him  for  perjury  in  this  case.  He 
therefore,  not  only  believes  that  he  will  not  be  punished  by  those 
laws,  but  he  knows  to  a moral  certainty  that  he  cannot  be.  Yet  with 
all  this  restraint  taken  off,  he  is  a competent  witness.  Then  is  it  not 
absurd  to  say  what  our  law  now  says,  that  a man  can  not  be  a wit- 
ness unless  he  believes  that  the  Supreme  Being  will  punish  him, 
either  in  this  world,  or  the  world  to  come,  for  false  swearing?  That 
unless  he  swears  under  this  fear,  which  may  be  a fear  limited  to  pun- 
ishment in  this  life,  he  will  most  assuredly  commit  perjury. 

I have  devoted  more  time  to  this  point,  than  I intended;  and  in 
my  next,  shall  endeavor  to  point  out  some  of  the  absurdities  of  this 
rule  of  exclusion. 


No.  3. 

Agreeable  to  my  promise  in  my  last  number,  I now  proceed  to 
point  out  some  of  the  absurdities  and  inconsistencies  of  the  rule  that 
renders  a witness  incompetent  on  account  of  his  religious  belief. 

FIRST.  This  rule  of  exclusion  is  inconsistent  with  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  State;  and  is  at  war  with  some  of  the  most  valued  and 
most  sacred  principles,  embodied  in  that  charter  of  our  liberties  and 
civil  rights.  The  constitution  after  prescribing  the  oath  or  affirm- 
ation taken  by  every  officer,  and  which  is  merely  to  support  the  con- 
stitution of  the  State  and  of  the  United  States,  and  faithfully  dis- 
charge the  duties  of  his  office,  then  declares  in  the  most  express  and 
unequivocal  language,  that  “no  other  oath,  declaration,  or  test,  shall 
be  required  as  a qualification  for  any  office  or  public  trust.”  From 
this  it  is  clear  that  by  the  constitution,  the  most  stubborn  infidel  is 
eligible  to  the  highest  office  in  the  State.  He  may  be  elected  gov- 
ernor or  appointed  to  the  office  of  chancellor,  or  that  of  Judge  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  and  his  infidelity  is  no  disqualification  whatever. 
Then  this  strange  absurdity  is  presented  by  the  constitution  and  laws 
of  this  State.  They  permit  a man  whose  oath  or  affirmation  would 


78 


THE  PAMPHLET  OF  “JURIDICUS.1 


not  be  received  in  a Justice's  Court  to  establish  an  indebtedness  of 
one  dollar,  in  a case  where  he  had  no  possible  motive  or  interest  to 
testify  falsely,  to  sway  the  whole  executive  influence  of  this  great 
State;  to  nominate  and  appoint  most  of  the  important  officers  of  the 
State;  and  in  times  of  war,  when  not  only  the  property  and  happi- 
ness of  a million  and  a half  of  souls  may  depend  upon  the  integrity 
and  patriotism  of  that  man  who  has  the  direction  and  command  of 
the  public  force,  I say  at  that  perilous  crisis,  this  same  man,  who 
would  not  be  permitted  to  testify  in  a Justice’s  Court,  is  by  the  con- 
stitution, commander  in  chief  of  our  armies  and  admiral  of  our 
navies.  Is  not  this  a gross  absurdity?  Is  it  not  perfectly  ridiculous 
to  say  that  a man  may  take  an  oath  or  affirmation,  and  that  too  when 
none  of  the  pains  and  penalties  of  perjury  are  inflicted  for  its  viola- 
tion, that  shall  insure  a faithful  performance  of  all  these  responsible 
trusts,  and  yet  the  same  man  shall  not  be  permitted  in  a court  of 
justice  to  testify  that  he  saw  one  of  his  neighbors  lend  another  one  a 
dollar,  for  fear  he  will  swear  falsely?  But  again,  by  the  constitution 
of  the  State,  your  Governor  may  be  a professed  atheist,  whose  oath 
by  the  laws  of  the  State  would  not  be  received  to  convict  a man  of  an 
assault  and  battery,  or  petit  larceny,  and  yet  by  the  same  constitution 
this  same  Governor  has  the  power  of  pardoning  the  criminal  for  the 
highest  crimes  after  conviction.  But  to  place  the  subject  in  a still 
stronger  light,  let  us  suppose  a case  that  might  occur  by  the  laws  and 
constitution  of  this  State.  A.  is  indicted  for  murder  committed  in 
the  village  of  Buffalo  on  the  1st  day  of  January,  1832,  and  he  alleges 
that  on  that  day  he  was  in  the  city  of  Albany,  transacting  business 
with  the  Governor  of  the  State;  and  it  so  happens  that  the  Governor 
is  an  atheist  or  infidel  of  that  character  that  he  is  not  allowed  to  be  a 
witness : — Witnesses  are  called  to  testify  that  they  think  the  man  at 
the  bar  is  the  same  person  whom  they  saw  run  out  of  the  house  when 
the  murder  was  committed;  and  if  so,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  he 
was  the  one  who  committed  it.  The  governor  is  called  upon  to 
prove  the  man’s  innocence,  by  showing  that  he  was  with  him  in 
Albany  on  the  day  the  murder  was  committed,  and  that  therefore  he 
must  be  innocent.  He  is  objected  to  on  account  of  his  infidelity,  and 
declared  incompetent;  his  testimony  is  not  heard,  and  the  man  is 
convicted.  Yet  this  same  Governor,  who  could  not,  by  the  laws  of 
the  land,  testify  to  the  man’s  innocence,  with  all  the  horrors  of  a 
State  prison  before  him  if  he  testifies  falsely,  turns  round  and  makes 
out  a pardon  for  the  convicted  murderer,  that  sets  him  free  whether 
guilty  or  innocent.  Let  every  candid  person  look  at  this  case  and 
see  if  it  does  not  present  a most  gross  absurdity  in  the  constitution 
and  laws  of  the  State. 


THE  PAMPHLET  OF  “JURIDICUS.” 


79 


But  let  us  look  at  this  subject  in  another  point  of  view.  By  the 
constitution  an  infidel  or  atheist  may  be  elected  to  the  office  of 
justice  of  the  peace  and  take  the  office  and  discharge  its  duties.  If 
an  infidel,  he  sits  and  administers  an  oath  to  each  witness  that  the 
law  of  the  land  would  not  permit  him  to  take.  But  this  is  not  all ; as 
such  justice,  if  he  certifies  that  a judgment  has  been  rendered  before 
him  in  favor  of  A.  against  B.  for  fifty  dollars,  that  certificate  will  be 
conclusive  evidence  of  such  fact,  and  if  A.  should  bring  a suit  against 
B.  before  another  justice  to  recover  the  same,  this  certificate  would 
be  conclusive  evidence  in  his  favor,  and  at  the  same  time  if  this 
justice  had  produced  his  docket  and  offered  to  swear  to  it,  to  estab- 
lish such  judgment,  under  the  pains  and  penalties  of  perjury,  his  oath 
would  not  have  been  received.  And  the  case  presents  this  strange 
absurdity,  that  a man’s  bare  certificate  may  be  received  in  a court  of 
justice  to  establish  a fact,  when  his  testimony  under  oath  would  not 
be  received,  either  to  establish  it  or  contradict  it.  If  a justice  of  the 
peace  happens  to  be  an  atheist,  or  lack  the  legal  faith,  his  bare  certifi- 
cate will  be  received  to  establish  a judgment,  which  is  the  highest 
evidence  of  indebtedness,  when  his  testimony  under  oath  would  not 
be  received  to  show  that  it  had  been  paid.  Look  at  it.  Is  it  not 
absurd?  But  I forbear  to  pursue  the  subject  farther.  Every  reflect- 
ing man’s  mind  will  suggest  to  him  a thousand  such  absurdities  in  the 
application  of  this  rule ; and  it  appears  to  me  that  every  candid  mind 
must  be  satisfied  that  it  is  entirely  inconsistent  with  the  principles 
of  the  constitution — opposed  to  all  the  free  principles  of  our  govern- 
ment— and  supremely  ridiculous  when  compared  with  the  official  dis- 
tinction and  confidence  which  the  constitution  has  conferred  upon 
this  class  of  our  citizens. 

I shall  note  other  inconsistencies  and  absurdities  of  this  rule  in 
my  next. 

No.  4. 

At  the  conclusion  of  my  last  number  I proposed  to  consider  in 
this,  other  inconsistencies  and  absurdities  of  that  rule  of  law  that 
renders  a witness  incompetent  on  account  of  his  religious  belief. 

Why  is  the  witness  declared  incompetent?  The  reason  assigned 
is,  that  if  he  should  be  sworn,  he  would  be  more  likely  to  testify 
falsely  than  truly,  and  for  that  reason  his  testimony  would  be  more 
likely  to  cause  injustice  than  to  aid  in  doing  justice.  This  is  the  only 
reason  that  is,  or  can  now  be  assigned  for  rendering  a witness  in- 
competent on  account  of  his  religious  belief. 

But  how  are  you  to  know  what  a witness’  religious  opinions  are? 
They  are  not  exposed  to  the  view  of  mankind.  They  are  not  per- 


80 


THE  PAMPHLET  OF  “ JURIDICUS ” 


ceptible  to  any  sense  with  which  the  author  of  our  being  has  endowed 
us.  It  is  utterly  impossible  in  the  very  nature  of  things  for  one 
man  to  know  another’s  religious  sentiments.  They  are  comprised  in 
his  thoughts,  in  his  opinions — which  he  may  or  may  not  publish  to 
the  world,  as  he  pleases.  But  yet  you  must  have  evidence  of  those 
thoughts  and  those  opinions  before  you  can  exclude  him  as  a wit- 
ness. Where  will  you  seek  for  the  evidence?  You  must  find  it  in 
the  declarations  of  the  witness,  for  it  can  not  be  found  elsewhere. 
Then  let  us  look  at  the  process  by  which  this  important  fact  is  to  be 
established,  and  the  absurd  deductions  which  are  drawn  from  it. 

The  witness  is  called  upon  the  stand,  and  before  any  oath  is  ad- 
ministered to  him,  he  is  asked  if  he  believes  in  the  existence  of  a 
Supreme  Being,  who  will  punish  him  for  false  swearing?  He 
answers,  No.  Now  this  answer  is  either  true  or  false.  If  false,  why 
then  he  should  be  admitted  as  a witness,  and  would  be  legally  com- 
petent by  the  laws  of  the  land;  but  if  true,  then  he  is  to  be  rejected. 
This  is  admirable  logic ! beautiful  consistency ! and  when  placed  in 
due  form,  reads  thus : — A.  was  introduced  as  a witness,  and  it  be- 
came necessary  to  prove  by  him  a certain  fact,  to  wit,  that  he  did  not 
believe  in  a Supreme  Being.  He  stated  without  being  under  oath, 
or  feeling  any  apprehension  of  having  inflicted  upon  him  the  pains 
and  penalties  of  perjury  for  stating  a falsehood,  that  he  did  not.  The 
court  concluded  that  he  had  spoken  the  truth,  and  that  the  fact  was 
established  that  he  did  not  believe;  and  he  having  spoken  the  truth 
in  this  instance  with  strong  temptations  to  tell  a falsehood  and  no 
restraints  to  prevent  it,  thereupon  they  arrived  at  this  natural  and 
logical  conclusion,  that  if  he  should  be  put  under  oath,  and  be  thereby 
subjected  to  the  infamy  and  punishment  inflicted  for  perjury,  that  he 
would  most  assuredly  testify  falsely,  and  therefore,  he  should  not  be 
permitted  to  testify  further.  In  brief,  he  has  told  the  truth  when 
not  under  oath, — and  this  induces  a legal  presumption,  that  he  would 
commit  perjury  if  put  under  oath,  and  therefore  he  shall  not  be 
sworn  at  all. 

But  look  at  the  absurdity  of  this  process  in  another  point  of  view. 
The  honest,  honorable,  upright  man,  who  would  not  tell  an  untruth 
to  save  his  right  arm,  whether  under  oath  or  not;  when  questioned 
as  to  his  belief,  though  it  varies  from  the  common  standard,  freely, 
candidly  and  fearlessly  confesses  it,  and  is  rejected;  while  the  dis- 
honest, lying  hypocrite  denies  what  his  real  sentiments  are,  tells  a 
falsehood,  and  is  admitted  to  testify. 

But  says  the  objector,  we  have  reconciled  these  absurdities  and 
obviated  these  difficulties,  by  not  questioning  the  witness  on  the  stand 
as  to  his  religious  belief,  but  by  requiring  the  fact  to  be  proved  by 


THE  PAMPHLET  OF  “ JURIDICUS  ” 


81 


other  witnesses.  Let  us  look  at  this  a moment  and  see  if  it  be  so. 
What  is  the  fact  to  be  established  to  exclude  the  witness  ? It  is,  that 
at  the  time  he  is  offered  as  a witness,  he  does  not  believe  certain 
things.  For  it  is  of  no  consequence  what  his  belief  or  disbelief  may 
have  been  before.  If  it  then  comes  up  to  the  legal  standard,  he  is  to 
be  admitted,  if  it  is  then  deficient,  he  is  to  be  rejected.  Now  the 
declarations  of  the  witness  objected  to  are  to  be  the  evidence  of  his 
belief,  whether  those  declarations  be  made  directly  to  the  court,  or 
be  made  to  some  other  person  who  states  them  to  the  court.  They 
are  in  either  case  nothing  but  his  declarations.  And  their  truth  is 
not  in  the  least  verified  or  strengthened  by  having  another  witness 
swear  to  them.  All  the  witness  can  say,  is,  that  the  man  made  such 
declarations  as  to  his  religious  belief.  But  whether  he  spoke  the 
truth  or  not,  it  is  impossible  for  him  to  tell,  and  the  court  would 
never  inquire.  But  in  this  case  they  take  it  for  granted  he  did  speak 
the  truth,  that  the  witness  who  has  testified  to  what  he  said,  has 
been  enabled  to  recollect  distinctly  and  does  now  testify  truly,  and 
that  the  proffered  witness  since  that  time  has  not  changed  his  belief. 
This  is  making  a great  many  very  liberal  presumptions  to  establish 
the  existence  of  that  all  important  fact,  that  shall  render  the  witness 
incompetent.  And  this  is  the  way,  after  the  court  have  piled  pre- 
sumption on  presumption,  they  at  last  arrive  at  that  fancied  degree  of 
certainty  that  they  refuse  testimony  to  shew  that  they  can  be  mis- 
taken. When  the  fact  to  be  established  is  that  the  proffered  witness 
is  now  an  infidel,  they  receive  proof  that  he  said  he  was  six  months 
ago,  and  would  refuse  to  receive  his  own  oath  to  shew  that  he  had 
since  changed  his  mind,  and  was  now  an  orthodox  Christian  of  the 
“straightest  sect.” 

If  a witness  says  out  of  court  that  he  is  interested  in  the  event  of 
a certain  cause,  the  court  will  not  take  his  declaration  out  of  court  as 
proof  of  the  fact.  They  will  require  other  proof  of  the  fact  in  court, 
in  order  to  render  the  witness  incompetent  on  account  of  his  interest. 
Why?  Because,  say  the  court,  he  is  not  under  oath  and  may  there- 
fore state  that  he  has  an  interest,  when  he  has  none,  merely  to  avoid 
testifying  against  a friend.  This  is  undoubtedly  good  reasoning  and 
sound  law,  yet  the  courts  do  not  appear  to  have  noticed  that  the 
cases  are  precisely  parallel.  In  the  one  case  you  wish  to  establish  the 
fact  that  the  proffered  witness  is  interested,  to  prevent  his  being 
sworn.  You  offer  to  prove  that  he  has  said  he  was  interested,  and 
the  court  will  tell  you  that  it  is  not  sufficient  evidence  to  establish  the 
fact.  In  the  other  case  you  wish  to  establish  the  fact  that  the  wit- 
ness disbelieves  in  the  existence  of  a Diety,  to  render  him  incom- 
petent. You  prove  that  he  has  said  so,  and  the  court  tell  you  that  is 


82 


THE  PAMPHLET  OF  “JURIDICUS.” 


sufficient  to  establish  the  fact.  And  the  mischief  to  be  apprehended 
in  the  one  case  is  precisely  the  same  as  in  the  other;  and  the  same 
policy  that  should  exclude  that  kind  of  evidence  in  the  one  case, 
should  in  the  other. 

Let  us  see  the  frauds  that  may  be  practised  under  this  rule  of  ex- 
clusion. Such  things  are  best  understood  by  their  practical  operation. 
We  will  therefore  suppose  a case.  A.  is  indicted  for  murder,  and  B., 
his  relative,  or  intimate  friend,  happens  to  be  the  only  witness  by 
whose  testimony  the  crime  can  be  established.  B.  does  not  wish  to 
commit  perjury,  nor  will  he,  even  to  save  his  friend;  but  by  a mutual 
understanding  between  them,  he  will  go  and  tell  some  third  person 
that  he  does  not  believe  in  a Diety,  or  a future  state  of  rewards  and 
punishments.  This  third  person  will  be  subpoenaed  as  a witness,  and 
when  B.  is  called  upon  the  stand,  he  will  be  objected  to  on  account  of 
his  religious  belief,  and  then  the  third  person  will  be  called  upon  to 
swear  to  what  B.  told  him,  and  having  testified  to  it,  B.  is  declared 
incompetent,  and  A.  is  acquitted.  This  is  no  imaginary  case,  but  one 
which  I am  credibly  informed,  actually  occurred  in  one  of  the  eastern 
counties  of  this  State.  Should  not  the  bare  fact  that  this  rule  of  law 
opens  such  temptations  and  facilities  to  frauds  of  this  kind,  be  suffi- 
cient to  insure  its  abrogation?  Look  at  it  candidly,  and  dispassion- 
ately, and  decide  for  yourself. 


JURIDICUS. 


MR.  FILLMORE 


AS  REPRESENTATIVE 


IN  CONGRESS 


DEBATES  AND  SPEECHES  OF 


MR.  FILLMORE  IN  CONGRESS 


Mr.  Fillmore  took  his  seat  in  the  Twenty-third  Congress, 
as  a member  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  December  2, 
1833.1 * 3  The  first  session  continued  till  June  30,  1834.  Mr. 
Fillmore  was  a member  of  the  standing  committee  on  the 
District  of  Columbia.  On  December  23d  he  offered  his  first 
motion  in  the  House,  as  follows : 

“Resolved,  That  the  Committee  on  Military  Affairs  be 
instructed  to  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  so  modifying 
the  existing  law  in  relation  to  the  militia  of  the  several 
States,  as  to  permit  each  State,  in  time  of  peace,  in  the  dis- 
cretion of  its  Legislature,  to  require  no  person  to  bear  arms 
under  21  or  over  40  years  of  age;  and  to  permit  the  inspec- 
tion of  arms  to  be  taken  by  companies,  instead  of  by  regi- 
ments or  battalions ; and  also  into  the  propriety  of  provid- 
ing arms  and  accoutrements  at  the  public  expense  for  those 
liable  to  bear  arms;  and  that  they  be  required  to  report  to 
this  House  by  bill  or  otherwise.” 

Mr.  Fillmore  subsequently,  by  unanimous  consent, 
changed  the  reference  of  the  foregoing  resolution  to  a select 

1.  In  1832  Erie  County  was  made  the  Thirty-second  Congressional  Dis- 
trict of  New  York  State,  and  Mr.  Fillmore  was  the  first  Representative  of  the 
district  as  so  constituted.  His  predecessor  in  the  Twenty-second  Congress, 
Bates  Cook,  of  Niagara  County,  represented  the  Thirtieth  District,  which  then 

comprised  Chautauqua,  Erie  and  Niagara  counties.  In  the  Twenty-fourth 
Congress,  March  4,  1835,  to  March  3,  1837,  Erie  County  was  represented  by 
Thomas  C.  Love.  Mr.  Fillmore  was  reelected  to  the  Twenty-fifth,  Twenty- 
sixth  and  Twenty-seventh  Congresses,  serving  from  March  4,  1837,  to  March 

3.  1843. 


85 


86 


MR.  FILLMORE  IN  CONGRESS. 


committee,  previously  appointed  on  subjects  of  like  char- 
acter. The  construction  of  a bridge  over  the  Potomac,  being 
under  consideration,  Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  in  favor  of  refer- 
ring the  subject  to  the  committee  on  District  of  Columbia. 
He  shared  in  discussion  on  the  Army  Appropriation  bill. 
He  presented,  among  other  memorials,  one  signed  by  700 
citizens  of  Buffalo,  “without  reference  to  party,  adopted  on 
the  19th  of  February,”  in  favor  of  a restoration  of  the  public 
deposits1  to  the  Bank  of  the  United  States.  His  first  ex- 
tended remarks  in  the  House  were  on  a bill  for  the  relief 
of  Abraham  Fobes,  a veteran  of  the  War  of  1812,  propos- 
ing to  give  him  640  acres  of  Government  land.  Mr.  Fillmore 
sought  to  have  the  bill  amended  so  that  Fobes  could  take  up 
the  land  in  quarter  sections.  This  motion  being  lost,  Mr. 
Fillmore  on  January  6th  said  in  substance,  in  further  debate : 

CASE  OF  ABRAHAM  FOBES,  A SPY  OF  THE  WAR  OF  l8l2. 

Abraham  Fobes,  the  petitioner,  being  a constituent  of  his, 
with  whom  he  was  well  acquainted,  he  felt  it  a duty  to  an- 
swer some  of  the  objections  which  had  been  made  to  the 
bill  for  his  relief.  He  regretted  that  he  was  not  more 
familiar  with  the  documentary  evidence  upon  which  the 
bill  was  reported ; but,  from  what  had  been  read,  it  appeared 
that  this  man,  before  the  last  war,  removed  into  Canada  in 
affluent  circumstances.  That,  after  the  declaration  of  war, 
he  returned  to  his  native  country,  and  took  up  arms  in  her 
defence.  That  his  family  returned  to  this  country  destitute, 
and  he  could  bear  witness  that  he  was  yet  poor.  During  the 
war,  he  rendered  services  of  a peculiar  kind,  most  hazardous 
and  dangerous  in  themselves,  and  most  important  to  the 
Government.  He  acted  as  a spy.  He  had  the  confidence  of 
his  commanding  officers,  Colonel  Christie,2  and  discharged 

1.  The  contemporary  spelling  for  the  designation  of  these  funds  was 
invariably  “Deposites.” 

2.  Lieutenant-Colonel  John  Chrystie,  died  at  Fort  George  in  Canada  July 
22,  1813. 


CASE  OF  ABRAHAM  FOBES. 


87 


this  delicate  and  dangerous  trust  to  his  entire  satisfaction. 
He  was  promised  by  Colonel  Christie  a handsome  reward, 
but  that  officer’s  premature  death  had  prevented  his  ever 
realizing  it. 

“He  now  asks  justice,  and  only  justice,  at  our  hands. 
But  it  is  insisted  that,  if  we  give  him  anything,  we  shall  only 
allow  him  the  same  that  was  given  to  a Canadian  volunteer. 
When  we  legislate  for  a whole  class  of  citizens,  we  must 
necessarily  bring  them  within  the  same  rule.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  make  a distinction,  and  graduate  the  reward  accord- 
ing to  merit.  This  man’s  case  does  not  come  within  that 
general  rule.  He  was  not  provided  for  by  that  general  act, 
and,  as  we  have  to  act  upon  his  case  individually,  it  is  cer- 
tainly right  to  look  into  the  merits  of  the  case.  These  ser- 
vices, then,  were  not  the  ordinary  services  of  a soldier. 
They  required  information  and  qualifications  of  a peculiar 
kind,  to  enable  him  to  perform  them;  and  their  perform- 
ance exposed  him  to  great  and  imminent  danger.  Can  a 
man  say  this  compensation,  thus  long  delayed,  was  ample?” 
He  thought  not ; and  thought  the  case  fairly  distinguishable 
from  that  of  an  ordinary  volunteer. 

As  to  the  objection  that  we  were  liable  to  be  imposed  upon 
by  false  testimony  at  so  great  a length  of  time  after  the 
occurrence,  Mr.  Fillmore  admitted  that  the  objection  had 
its  weight  when  you  present  a case  to  which  it  is  applicable. 
But  the  evidence  in  this  case  was  not  subject  to  that  objec- 
tion. It  has  been  read,  and  appeared  to  have  been  taken 
immediately  after  the  transaction ; and,  unless  those  written 
affidavits  and  certificates  have  changed,  they  are  as  good 
evidence  of  the  facts  now,  as  they  were  when  taken. 

As  to  the  objection  of  the  honorable  gentleman  from 
Ohio  [Mr.  Vance],  that  the  name  of  this  poor  petitioner 
sounded  familiar  to  him,  he  said,  he  hoped  that  that  circum- 
stance would  not  prejudice  the  rights  of  this  unfortunate 
claimant.  He  doubted  not  the  name  was  familiar  to  the 
honorable  gentleman — not  for  the  reason  supposed  by  him, 
that  he  had  already  been  compensated;  but  from  the  fact 
that  he  had  long  been  a petitioner  at  the  bar  of  that  House 


88 


CASE  OF  ABRAHAM  FOBES. 


for  the  compensation  which  this  bill  proposed  to  give.  He 
could  not  say  positively,  but  he  understood  that  the  petitioner 
had  never  yet  received  any  compensation  for  these  services ; 
and  he  hoped  this  act  of  justice  would  be  no  longer  delayed. 


SPEECH  ON  THE 


GENERAL  APPROPRIATION  BILL 

APRIL  17,  1834 


April  17th,  the  question  being  on  a general  reduction  of 
salaries  in  the  Departments,  Mr.  Fillmore  said,  in  substance: 

Having  voted  thus  far  in  favor  of  the  amendment,  he 
wished  to  give  the  reasons  which  had  influenced  his  vote. 
It  was  his  belief  that  the  salaries  at  present  paid  by  this 
Government  were  too  high.  He  did  not  possess  knowledge 
enough  to  enable  him  to  judge  with  accuracy,  but  it  was 
apparent  to  him  that  the  course  of  the  Government  had  been 
such  as  must  raise  the  value  of  money,  and  depreciate  in 
proportion  that  of  all  other  things.  This,  indeed,  seemed  to 
be  conceded  on  all  hands ; and  if  the  fact  were  so,  and  the 
community  were  suffering  by  the  act  of  the  Government,  he 
deemed  it  no  more  than  right  and  just  that  the  legislators 
themselves,  and  all  public  officers,  from  the  President  down, 
should  in  this  respect  be  put  upon  an  equality  with  the 
people.  If  the  same  amount  of  money  would  now  purchase 
more  of  all  the  necessaries  and  comforts  of  life  than  it 
would  formerly,  then  the  salaries,  though  reduced  in 
amount,  would  still  be  in  effect  the  same.  It  had  been  said 
that  this  was  not  the  proper  time  or  place  to  introduce  such 
a reduction.  Most  of  the  gentlemen  who  had  spoken  pro- 
fessed themselves  to  be  in  favor  of  the  measure  at  some 
time,  and  under  other  circumstances,  but  not  just  now.  Mr. 
Fillmore  was  ready  to  grant  that  a bill  of  supplies  was  not 


89 


90 


GENERAL  APPROPRIATION  BILL,  1834. 


the  most  appropriate  bill  in  which  to  introduce  this  reduction 
of  salaries;  but,  according  to  the  opinion  which  had  been 
advanced  by  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Ways  and 
Means,  such  a bill  was  a fit  place  both  for  raising  and 
diminishing  the  annual  allowance  of  persons  employed  by 
the  Government;  for  he  observed,  that  in  the  fortieth  line 
of  this  bill  there  was  an  item  for  an  additional  watchman 
at  one  of  the  Departments,  and  for  an  increased  compensa- 
tion to  watchmen  now  employed.  If  an  appropriation  bill 
was  a fit  place  to  increase  salaries,  it  was  equally  a fit  place 
to  diminish  them.  It  might  be  said  that  these  were  only 
individual  cases,  and  not  a general  provision;  yet,  if  the 
principle  was  sound,  it  applied  equally  to  all  cases  of  the 
kind. 

But  there  was  a still  stronger  reason  why  the  reduction 
should  be  introduced  now.  It  would  be  improper  to  appro- 
priate the  amount  of  money  proposed  by  this  bill,  if  in  fact 
it  was  not  to  be  received.  If  the  salaries  were  to  be  reduced 
at  all,  it  ought  to  be  known,  and  the  rate  ascertained  before 
the  bill  was  passed.  In  fixing  the  rate  of  compensation  for 
persons  in  the  employ  of  the  General  Government,  it  might 
be  well  for  Congress  to  look  a little  about  them,  at  what 
was  allowed  to  those  under  the  State  Governments.  He 
was  best  acquainted  with  the  salaries  of  his  own  State  (New 
York),  and  he  would  for  a moment  compare  some  of  the 
amounts  allowed  to  the  Federal  officers  with  those  which 
were  paid  there. 

The  four  heads  of  Departments  under  this  Government 
received  an  annual  salary  of  $6,000  each,  while  the  Governor 
of  his  State,  which  had  not  inappropriately  been  denomi- 
nated the  Empire  State,  received  but  $4,000.  Here  the  Gov- 
ernment paid  many  of  their  clerks  a salary  of  $1,600,  and 
some  of  its  commissioners  received  $2,000  and  $3,000. 
Now,  the  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  New  York,  who 
were  not  only  to  decide  in  all  causes  of  common  law,  but 
who  occupied  seats  in  the  Court  of  Errors,  which  was  the 
court  of  highest  and  last  resort  in  that  State,  and  whose 
duties  occupied  them  continually  throughout  the  whole  year, 


GENERAL  APPROPRIATION  BILL,  1834. 


91 


received  but  $2,000,  and  no  perquisites  of  any  sort.  This 
had  been  the  case  for  more  than  twelve  years ; and  yet,  with 
no  higher  salary,  these  stations  had  commanded  the  best 
talents  of  the  State.  There  was  but  one  court  of  chancery 
for  that  whole  State,  the  most  commercial  State  in  the 
Union,  and  yet  the  chancellor  received  but  $2,000,  and  the 
place  was  sought  by  the  most  talented  men  of  the  profession. 
Was  it  not  grossly  unjust  that  the  same  amount  should  be 
allowed  by  this  Government  to  a mere  copyist,  a scrivener, 
whose  occupation  required  neither  learning  nor  talents? 
Mr.  Fillmore  would  not  say  but  that  the  salaries  in  New 
York  were  too  low.  It  had  been  proposed  to  augment  some 
of  them  by  adding  $500,  but  not  more.  Admitting  they 
were  too  low,  it  must  still  be  acknowledged  that  the  salaries 
under  this  Government  were  too  high.  Mr.  Fillmore  was  in 
favor  of  the  amendment,  for  another  reason.  Some  gentle- 
men spoke  of  raising  a committee  to  graduate  the  salaries 
generally;  but  let  him  tell  those  gentlemen,  from  his  small 
experience,  that  if  they  wanted  to  see  who  were  receiving 
too  much,  and  who  too  little,  the  most  effectual  plan  would 
be  to  reduce  the  whole,  and  that  would  bring  before  the 
House  speedy  applications  from  those  who  could  make  out 
a good  case.  But  as  long  as  Congress  should  pursue  a course 
which  made  it  the  interest  of  all  office-holders  not  to  expose 
each  other,  lest  their  own  compensation  should  be  reduced, 
nothing  in  the  way  of  reduction  could  ever  be  effected. 

[The  debate  being  shared  in  by  various  members,  at  a 
later  hour  Mr.  Fillmore  continued:] 

The  honorable  gentleman  from  Alabama  [Mr.  McKinley] 
seemed  to  think  that  it  would  be  a violation  of  the  public 
faith  to  those  persons  now  in  office  to  reduce  their  salaries. 
This,  he  confessed,  was  a novel  doctrine  to  him.  He  had 
supposed  that  the  salary  of  every  officer,  except  that  of  the 
President  and  those  of  the  judiciary,  were  entirely  under 
the  control  of  the  legislative  authority.  The  very  fact  that 
the  Constitution  had  declared  that  you  should  not  reduce 
the  salaries  of  the  President  and  those  of  the  judges,  during 


92 


GENERAL  APPROPRIATION  BILL,  1834. 


their  continuance  in  office,  left  the  strongest  possible  impli- 
cation to  his  mind,  that  the  salaries  of  all  other  officers  were 
under  the  entire  control  of  Congress.  This  was  the  first 
time  that  he  had  ever  heard  that  doctrine  seriously  contro- 
verted. What  would  be  the  consequence  of  the  doctrine  con- 
tended for  by  that  honorable  gentleman?  Why,  that  one 
Congress  after  another  may  go  on,  from  time  to  time,  in- 
creasing the  salaries  of  your  officers  to  any  amount,  and  it 
would  be  out  of  the  power  of  any  subsequent  Legislature  to 
reduce  them,  unless  they  should  chance  to  be  in  session,  and 
the  office  should  happen  to  be  vacant  at  the  same  time. 
These  two  fortuitous  circumstances  might  not  occur  simul- 
taneously in  many  years;  the  consequence  of  which  would 
be,  that  the  mistake,  or  even  corruptions  of  one  Congress 
could  not  be  corrected  in  many  years,  if  ever.  He  thought 
the  honorable  gentleman  must  be  mistaken,  and  that  there 
could  be  no  doubt  that  they  possessed  the  right,  without  any 
violation  of  faith,  to  reduce  these  salaries  at  any  time. 

But  he  had  been  charged  by  that  honorable  gentleman 
with  saying  that  his  object  in  reducing  these  salaries  was 
to  relieve  the  people  from  burdens  which  the  present  state 
of  affairs  rendered  them  ill  able  to  bear ; and  the  honorable 
gentleman  says,  if  relief  to  the  people  is  intended,  it  should 
be  afforded  by  reducing  taxation,  not  by  reducing  the 
salaries  of  officers.  He  had  taken  a very  different  view  of 
that  subject.  He  had  supposed  that,  in  order  to  give  actual 
and  permanent  relief  to  the  people,  it  was  necessary  to 
reduce  the  expenditure  of  their  money.  Cut  down  the 
expenses  of  your  Government  so  as  not  to  require  so  much 
to  be  raised  by  taxation,  and  then  you  can  reduce  your 
taxes;  but  if  you  reduce  your  income  without  retrenching 
your  expenses,  you  will  only  gain  temporary  relief  by  run- 
ning in  debt.  The  gentleman  seems  to  have  imbibed  an 
impression  that  it  was  necessary  to  expend  all  the  money 
you  raise  in  paying  salaries  of  officers.  He  [Mr.  Fillmore J 
admitted  no  such  necessity.  He  could  see  no  reason  why 
the  whole  revenue  of  the  nation  should  be  lavished  upon  its 
officers.  He  thought  they  ought  to  be  allowed  a fair  com- 


GENERAL  APPROPRIATION  BILL,  1834. 


93 


pensation  for  their  services,  and  then,  if  there  were  any 
surplus  funds,  they  could  be  well  and  advantageously  applied 
in  the  improvement  of  harbors,  and  in  the  construction  of 
roads  and  canals,  and  other  public  works  in  which  the  people 
have  a direct  and  deep  interest. 

The  honorable  gentleman  has  also  said  that,  if  the  cur- 
rency be  deranged,  the  office-holders  suffer  equally  with  the 
people.  This,  Mr.  Fillmore  said,  he  denied — that  the  de- 
rangement of  the  currency  was  of  that  nature  that  it  had  a 
direct  tendency  to  injure  the  people  and  benefit  the  office- 
holder, who  received  a fixed  compensation  in  cash  for  his 
services.  What  was  the  derangement  complained  of  ? Why, 
it  was  this : the  action  of  the  Government  had  been  such  as 
to  decrease  greatly  the  amount  of  the  circulating  medium, 
by  which  the  value  of  all  property  is  measured.  The  conse- 
quence of  this  is,  that  money,  in  consequence  of  its  scarcity, 
has  greatly  increased  in  value,  as  compared  with  the  ordi- 
nary products  of  the  country.  Or,  which  is  the  same  thing, 
the  property  of  the  country  has  greatly  decreased  in  value, 
when  that  value  is  to  be  estimated  in  money.  He  said  he 
had  not  the  means  of  telling  precisely  what  was  this  in- 
crease in  the  value  of  money,  and  corresponding  decrease  in 
the  value  of  other  property.  He  had  reason  to  believe, 
however,  that  it  was  one-fourth  or  more.  He  believed, 
from  the  best  information  which  he  could  obtain,  that  $100 
would  buy  as  much  wheat  now  as  $125  would  six  months 
since,  and  probably  more.  If  this  be  so,  and  other  property 
has  fallen  in  the  same  ratio,  then  a salary  of  $100  is  as  good 
now  as  one  of  $125  was  six  months  since;  and,  so  far  from 
the  officers  having  suffered  equally  with  the  people,  they 
were  direct  gainers  by  it.  While  the  products  of  the  farmer 
and  mechanic  had  been  reduced  one- fourth  in  their  money 
value,  while  the  wages  of  the  day  laborer  have  been  reduced 
from  one  dollar  to  seventy-five  cents  per  day,  all  the  salaries 
of  all  your  officers  have  been,  for  all  practical  purposes, 
increased  in  the  same  ratio.  And  yet,  shall  we  be  told  that 
the  officers  suffer  equally  with  the  people  ? His  constituents, 
he  said,  were  too  intelligent  to  be  deceived  by  such  an  asser- 


94 


GENERAL  APPROPRIATION  BILL,  1834. 


tion.  They  felt  too  sensibly  the  embarrassments  under 
which  they  were  laboring. 

But,  said  Mr.  Fillmore,  another  honorable  gentleman, 
from  Pennsylvania  [Mr.  Galbraith],  has  said,  that  the  re- 
duction of  salaries  in  this  way  would  be  impracticable,  and 
lead  to  great  confusion;  that  officers  could  not  tell  what 
they  were  entitled  to  when  their  salaries  or  compensation 
was  reduced  25  per  cent.  This  was  a most  singular  objec- 
tion. It  had  struck  him  with  no  little  surprise.  What  were 
the  facts? 

Why,  your  officers  are  paid  either  by  fees  or  salaries. 
You  pass  a law  declaring  that  in  all  cases  hereafter  they 
shall  receive  but  three- fourths  of  what  they  were  hereto- 
fore entitled,  by  law,  to  receive.  Knowing  what  they  were 
entitled  to  receive  before  this  law  was  passed,  how  will  they 
ascertain  what  they  are  hereafter  to  receive?  He  said  he 
supposed  there  were  few  of  those  officers  who  did  not  under- 
stand the  fundamental  rules  of  arithmetic.  If  so,  they  had 
only  to  divide  the  amount  they  were  heretofore  entitled  to 
receive  by  four,  and  subtract  that  quotient  from  the  original 
sum,  and  the  difference  would  be  the  compensation  allowed 
by  this  amendment.  Were  the  proposition  to  increase  these 
salaries  and  fees  one-fourth,  he  thought  they  would  have  no 
difficulty  in  finding  out  how  much  the  law  had  permitted 
them  to  add ; and  the  arithmetical  process  was  equally  easy, 
though  the  inclination  might  vary,  to  ascertain  how  much 
the  law  had  compelled  them  to  subtract. 

But  he  said  he  had  been  told  by  his  honorable  colleague 
[Mr.  Vanderpoel],  that  he  was  altogether  mistaken  in  his 
facts,  and  that  there  was  no  such  depreciation  in  the  value 
of  property,  and  relative  increase  in  the  value  of  money,  as 
he  had  supposed ; that  the  whole  assumption,  in  the  peculiar 
classic  language  of  the  honorable  gentleman,  was  “all  a 
humbug.”  Mr.  Fillmore  said  he  might  be  mistaken,  but  he 
thought  not.  It  was  but  a short  time  since,  that  certain 
honorable  gentleman  said  that  the  great  embarrassment  and 
distress  that  prevailed  in  the  country  was  “all  a humbug.” 
Many  of  those  gentlemen  had  since  been  compelled  to  hold 


GENERAL  APPROPRIATION  BILL,  1834. 


95 


a different  language.  Now  the  honorable  gentleman  says 
that  the  scarcity  of  money  and  the  depreciation  in  the  value 
of  property  is  “all  a humbug.”  Mr.  Fillmore  said  that  wheat 
was  the  staple  product  of  that  part  of  the  State  of  New 
York  where  he  resided.  He  had  understood  that  the 
farmers,  who  heretofore  had  been  in  the  habit  of  receiving 
about  one  dollar  per  bushel,  had,  within  a few  months, 
found  it  difficult  to  obtain  cash  for  it  at  sixty-three  cents  per 
bushel.  If  so,  the  depreciation  in  its  value  was  more  than 
thirty-three  per  cent.  And  shall  they  be  told,  when  suffer- 
ing in  this  way,  that  it  is  “all  a humbug”?  Shall  their 
sufferings  be  mocked  with  language  like  this?  However 
lightly  the  gentleman  may  be  disposed  to  treat  this  matter, 
he  could  assure  that  honorable  gentleman  that  the  people 
who  were  groaning  under  these  oppressions — the  farmer, 
the  laborer,  and  the  mechanic — regarded  them  as  “hum- 
bugs” of  a most  serious  and  afflicting  nature. 

Mr.  Fillmore  said  his  honorable  colleague  had  said  he 
should  not  have  spoken,  had  not  he  [Mr.  Fillmore]  alluded 
to  the  State  of  New  York.  Yet  the  gentleman  had  not  con- 
tradicted a single  statement  which  Mr.  Fillmore  made  in 
relation  to  the  salaries  of  the  officers  of  that  State.  But  he 
had  said  that  the  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  and  the 
chancellor  accepted  these  offices  under  an  expectation  that 
their  salaries  were  to  be  increased.  He  should  like  to  know 
where  was  the  evidence  of  any  grounds  for  such  an  expec- 
tation? on  what  the  expection  was  founded?  It  was  new 
to  him.  But  one  thing  was  very  strange,  and  that  was,  if 
there  were  any  grounds  for  such  expectations,  that  they  had 
not  been  realized.  The  party  to  which  that  honorable  gen- 
tleman was  now  attached  had  long  had  a decided  majority 
in  the  Legislature.  They  had  had  it  in  their  power  to  meet 
these  just  expectations  of  the  judges,  if  they  thought  best. 

But  the  gentleman  says,  an  increase  of  the  judges’  sala- 
ries has  been  opposed  because  one  of  them,  when  in  the 
convention  for  framing  the  Constitution  of  the  State,  advo- 
cated a low  compensation  to  the  members  of  the  Legisla- 
ture. This,  Mr.  Fillmore  said,  might  have  had  an  influence 


96 


GENERAL  APPROPRIATION  BILL , 1834. 


with  some.  Those  who  had  the  power  to  pass  the  law,  and 
did  not,  could  tell  best  what  motives  prevented.  But  he 
would  like  to  know  why  or  how  that  prevented  the  increase 
of  the  salaries  of  the  circuit  judges,  who  only  received 
twelve  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  per  annum,  with  some 
perquisites  ? One  of  these  offices  was  filled,  and  he  believed 
ably  filled,  by  a brother  of  the  honorable  gentleman.  He 
should  like  to  know  why  these  able  judicial  officers  of  that 
State,  who  performed  arduous  and  responsible  duties,  were 
permitted  to  receive  this  small  compensation,  when  the  party 
to  which  they  and  the  honorable  gentleman  belonged  had 
the  entire  ascendency  in  the  legislative  councils  of  the  State, 
and  yet  pay  a mere  clerk  in  this  place  the  sum  of  sixteen 
hundred  dollars  per  year  ? Something  was  evidently  wrong 
about  this.  He  would  not  say  that  the  salaries  of  the  judges 
and  the  circuit  judges  of  the  State  of  New  York  were  or 
were  not  enough.  He  believed,  however,  that  their  most 
ardent  friends  had  only  proposed  to  raise  them  about  five 
hundred  dollars  each.  Even  that  increase  has  not  been 
made,  and  they  have  stood  as  they  now  are  for  about 
thirteen  years.  And  during  that  time,  he  believed,  there 
had  been  no  difficulty  in  commanding  the  best  judicial  talent 
in  the  State.  Then,  said  he,  is  there  not  something  grossly 
unjust  in  allowing  these  enormous  salaries  to  the  commis- 
sioners and  clerks  in  the  General  Government? 

He  saw  no  reason  why  the  Government  should  not  adopt 
the  same  rule  in  employing  its  servants  that  every  man 
adopted  in  his  own  business;  to  pay  that  amount  which 
would  command  the  services  of  a person  of  competent  tal- 
ents, skill,  integrity,  and  qualifications,  to  discharge  the 
duties  of  the  office,  and  no  more.  While  you  pay  such  large 
salaries  to  your  officers  of  the  Federal  Government,  and 
such  low  salaries  to  the  officers  of  the  State  Governments, 
it  is  offering  a bribe  for  every  man  of  talents  and  enterprise 
to  abandon  the  service  of  the  State  Governments,  and 
obtain  an  office  in  the  General  Government.  He  thought 
the  compensation  for  similar  services  ought  to  approximate 
nearer  than  what  it  did.  He  thought  the  salaries  of  the 


GENERAL  APPROPRIATION  BILL , 1834. 


97 


officers  in  the  General  Government  too  high.  It  would  be 
difficult,  he  thought,  to  make  a laboring  man,  who  toils  hard 
from  sunrise  to  sunset  for  seventy-five  cents,  understand 
what  justice  there  was  in  giving  to  one  of  your  secretaries 
almost  seventeen  dollars  a day,  or  to  a clerk,  who  labors 
only  five  or  six  hours,  five  dollars  per  day.  But  even  if  they 
were  made  to  see  and  acknowledge  the  justice  of  this  extra- 
ordinary difference,  they  must  still  think  it  extremely  unjust 
to  have  the  Government,  by  deranging  the  currency,  reduce 
their  small  pittance  one- fourth,  and  yet  continue  these  large 
compensations  to  the  public  servants  at  their  full  amount. 
He  did  not  see  the  injustice  in  this  reduction  of  salaries,  of 
which  the  gentleman  complained.  He  thought  it  the  highest 
act  of  justice.  He  believed  Members  of  Congress  were  paid 
less  for  their  services  and  sacrifices  than  any  other  officers 
of  the  Federal  Government,  with  but  few  exceptions.  Yet 
he  was  willing,  for  one,  to  participate  in  the  reduction.  He 
would  not  ask  another  to  do  that  which  he  would  not  do 
himself. 

Though  he  felt  that  he  was  guiltless  in  producing  the 
distress  and  embarrassments  under  which  the  people  then 
labored,  yet  he  was  no  more  innocent  than  they  were ; and, 
without  charging  intentional  wrong  to  any  one,  he  could 
only  say  that,  for  himself,  he  was  willing  to  participate  with 
the  community  in  the  privations  under  which  they  suffered. 
He  was  willing  to  suffer  a reduction  of  his  compensation,  in 
the  same  ratio  that  he  asked  the  other  officers  of  the  Gov- 
ernment to  reduce  theirs.  And  while  he  doubted,  somewhat, 
the  form  or  manner  of  making  these  reductions,  he  did  not 
doubt  the  justice  and  duty  of  the  act;  and  believing  that 
form  should  always  yield  to  substance,  the  clear  conviction 
of  duty  to  that  which  was  doubtful  in  manner,  he  should 
most  cheerfully  and  cordially  give  his  support  to  the  amend- 
ment offered  by  the  honorable  gentleman  from  Ohio  [Mr. 
Vance] . 


98 


ON  THE  SPECIE  TENDER  BILL. 


SPECIE  TENDER  BILL. 

On  May  2d,  a bill  for  making  certain  foreign  silver  coins 
a legal  tender  in  the  United  States,  was  before  the  House. 

Mr.  Fillmore  objected  to  the  provisions  of  the  bill  as  he 
understood  them.  Its  object  was  to  provide  that,  in  pay- 
ment of  all  sums  over  one  hundred  dollars,  certain  foreign 
coins  should  be  legal  tender,  according  to  their  weight  and 
fineness.  Now,  in  practice,  it  would  be  very  inconvenient 
for  the  person  making  a payment,  not  only  to  weigh,  but 
assay  the  coin.  He  thought  it  should  be  provided  that  if 
the  coin  bore  a certain  recognized  stamp,  the  burden  of 
showing  its  inferiority  to  the  standard  of  that  stamp  should 
be  cast  upon  the  obj  ecting  party.  Besides,  the  weighing  was 
very  inconvenient.  He  would  much  prefer  having  foreign 
coins  made  a legal  tender  by  tale,  as  they  were  now,  in  the 
ordinary  circulation  of  the  country. 

Mr.  Fillmore  said  that  the  bill  before  the  House  proposed 
to  make  foreign  coin  legal  tender  to  a certain  amount.  But, 
under  what  circumstances  was  this  coin  to  become  a tender  ? 
If  a man  owed  a debt,  and  had  a quantity  of  this  foreign 
money,  what  must  he  do?  He  must  first  get  it  assayed,  to 
see  if  it  was  of  the  requisite  fineness,  and  then  he  must  have 
it  weighed,  to  determine  whether  it  was  of  the  full  legal 
weight,  and  then,  after  all  this  trouble  and  ceremony,  he 
might  tender  the  money  in  payment  of  his  debt.  But  why 
did  men  coin  money?  To  what  end?  That  it  might,  in  the 
public  stamp  it  bore,  carry  with  it  prima  facie  evidence  both 
of  fineness  and  weight,  and  that  thus  the  constant  necessity 
of  weighing  and  assaying  might  be  saved.  The  present  bill 
threw  this  advantage  quite  away.  The  friends  of  the  bill 
themselves  admitted  that  the  coins  of  Mexico  were  usually 
of  the  requisite  fineness,  and  they  ascribed  great  credit  to 
the  Government  of  Mexico  that  such  was  the  fact.  Now, 
all  he  asked  was  a law  to  give  this  credit  in  a substantial 
form ; to  allow  that  coin  to  pass,  prima  facie,  as  the  requisite 
weight  and  quality,  and  to  throw  the  proof  to  the  contrary 
on  the  individual  who  should  refuse  it  when  tendered.  Why 


ON  THE  FORTIFICATION  BILL. 


99 


should  not  this  money  be  a legal  tender  in  payment  of  small 
debts  as  well  as  larger  ones?  Why  allow  banks  and  rich 
capitalists  to  pay  their  large  debts  in  a way  the  small  debtor 
cannot  pay  his  ? It  was  said,  that  the  value  of  our  metallic 
currency  must  be  raised:  he  had  no  objection  to  this;  but 
let  it  be  a whole  currency,  and  not  a partial  one.  Let  it  be 
a universal  tender  for  sums  great  and  small,  and  not  a cur- 
rency for  only  a part  of  the  community. 

ON  THE  FORTIFICATION  BILL. 

Much  debate  was  held  in  the  House,  in  June,  1834,  on  the 
bill  providing  or  improving  certain  fortifications.  On  a 
motion  to  strike  out  an  item  of  $100,000  for  the  fort  on 
George’s  Island,  Boston  harbor,  Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  at 
length. 

The  gentleman  from  Kentucky  [Mr.  Hawes],  he  said, 
seemed  to  congratulate  himself  on  obtaining  his  vote  against 
the  appropriation,  because  some  of  the  members  from 
Massachusetts  had  voted  to  lay  the  harbor  bill  on  the  table ; 
the  gentleman  would  find  himself  mistaken.  Mr.  Fillmore 
should  vote  on  every  bill  or  motion  submitted  in  that  House 
upon  its  own  merits;  and  should  not  be  governed  by  what 
might  have  been  the  course  of  particular  gentlemen  on  other 
bills.  He  had  at  first  supposed  that  there  was  some  differ- 
ence in  the  estimates  of  the  War  Department  and  the  gentle- 
man from  Tennessee  [Mr.  Polk]  as  to  the  cost  of  this  fort. 
He  now  found  that  there  was  none;  but  that  it  was  only 
intended  to  omit  the  appropriation  for  the  present  year. 
And  for  what  reason  was  it  to  be  omitted  ? Professedly,  on 
a recommendation  by  the  Secretary.  But  the  Secretary 
recommended  no  such  thing.  The  Secretary  had  recom- 
mended the  appropriation;  the  Committee  of  Ways  and 
Means  had  agreed  to  it,  and  had  reported  it  to  the  House; 
and  now,  after  months  had  elapsed,  an  informal  letter  to  a 
member  of  the  House  was  produced.  And  what  did  it 
state?  That  the  Secretary  had  changed  his  mind?  That 


100 


ON  THE  FORTIFICATION  BILL. 


he  had  discovered  some  reason  why  it  was  improper  to  make 
the  appropriation?  No:  nothing  like  it.  All  the  Secretary 
said  was,  that  if  the  House  were  determined  to  reduce  the 
sum  asked  for,  they  might  omit  this  fort.  That  was  the 
whole  of  this  letter,  so  much  relied  upon.  But  if  it  was 
proper  in  peace  to  prepare  for  war,  and  if  this  work  of  de- 
fence was  important  and  necessary,  what  was  there  in  that 
letter  to  induce  the  House  to  withhold  the  appropriation? 
Had  any  new  state  of  things  arisen  to  induce  the  Secretary, 
the  committee,  or  the  House,  to  change  their  views  ? It  was 
said  that  no  war  threatened  us.  But  had  we  not  as  much 
reason  to  expect  war  now  as  we  had  a few  months  since? 
Had  anything  occurred,  since  then,  to  impair  the  ability  of 
the  nation  to  defend  itself  ? Was  there  any  wisdom  in  omit- 
ting to  fortify  when  fortification  was  needed,  and  the 
treasury  able  to  bear  it?  Why,  then,  was  not  some  good 
reason  advanced  in  support  of  the  motion  to  strike  out? 
Why  were  the  House  to  be  told,  the  Secretary  recommended 
it?  Because  a work  had  not  yet  been  commenced,  did  that 
prove  that  it  was  unimportant ; or  even  that  it  was  less  im- 
portant than  other  works  which  had  been  commenced? 

Mr.  Fillmore  said  he  would  not  allude,  as  a gentleman 
had  done,  to  the  expenditure  under  a preceding  Administra- 
tion. Should  gentlemen  go  into  that  subject,  subjects  of 
profligacy  would  not  be  wanting ; but  he  did  not  admit  that 
works  of  internal  improvement,  or  works  of  military  de- 
fence, were  to  be  numbered  among  them.  The  gentleman 
seemed  to  consider  all  such  expenditures  as  mere  profligacy. 
But  Mr.  Fillmore  would  rather  point  to  high  salaries,  and 
to  the  enormous  system  of  pensions.  Money  judiciously 
applied  in  the  erection  of  fortifications  was  anything  but 
wasted.  The  gentleman  from  Kentucky  [Mr.  Hawes] 
might  not  fear  any  injury  he  should  sustain  from  an  attack 
on  Boston  harbor;  but  that  did  not  render  it  the  less  his 
duty  to  provide  for  its  defence.  The  country  was  one;  its 
safety  was  one.  It  was  then  his  duty  to  provide  for  the 
security  of  every  part  of  it.  Had  the  nation  ever  objected 
to  pay  the  expenses  of  the  late  border  war  to  protect  the 


ON  THE  NATIONAL  BANK. 


101 


West  from  the  ferocity  of  the  Indians?  Had  it  refused  to 
erect  forts  upon  the  frontier?  Ah,  but  all  these  were  na- 
tional expenditures.  Indeed ! and  was  not  a fort  to  protect 
a harbor  in  the  East  as  national  an  object  of  expenditure  as 
a fort  to  protect  the  frontiers  of  the  West?  Mr.  Fillmore 
should  vote  for  the  item.  Local  feelings  had  nothing  to  do 
with  it.  He  went  alike  for  Boston,  New  York,  and  New 
Orleans. 


THE  PUBLIC  MONEYS. 

The  following  resolution  being  before  the  House: 

“Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  be 
directed  to  communicate  to  this  House  whether,  in  his 
opinion,  it  is  practicable  or  convenient  for  that  Department 
to  collect,  safely  keep,  and  disburse  the  public  moneys  of 
the  United  States  without  the  agency  of  a bank  or  banks ; 
and  if  so,  to  report  to  this  House  the  best  mode,  in  his 
opinion,  by  which  that  object  can  be  accomplished,” 

Mr.  Fillmore,  on  January  3,  1835,  spoke  in  substance  as 
follows : 

He  regretted  extremely,  he  observed,  to  see  this  con- 
troversy on  the  subject  of  a national  bank  renewed  at  this 
time.  He  was  willing  that  every  species  of  information 
which  was  desired  should  be  obtained,  but  he  was  not  aware 
that  it  was  either  proper  or  common  to  ask  the  opinion  of 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  as  to  the  effect  of  legislative 
measures.  His  limited  experience  in  the  House  would  not, 
however,  justify  him  in  asserting  that  such  a call  was  un- 
usual and  improper.  But  it  appeared  to  him  to  be  undig- 
nified to  call  upon  the  head  of  a Department  for  an  opinion. 
It  had  been  said  that  there  was  no  difference  between  the 
power  of  creating  a fiscal  agent  and  employing  one  already 
in  existence:  but  to  this  he  would  not  assent.  The  power 
to  create  and  the  power  to  contract  with  or  employ  an  agent, 
were,  in  his  view,  separate  and  distinct  from  each  other. 
This  opinion  he  illustrated  by  various  instances.  We  might, 


102 


VIVA  VOCE  OR  BALLOT. 


for  example,  employ  a company  in  the  transportation  of 
stores  or  munitions  of  war,  without  having  the  power  to 
incorporate  a transportation  company.  He  did  not  under- 
take to  contradict  the  power,  on  the  part  of  the  Govern- 
ment, to  incorporate  a bank,  but  was  clearly  of  the  opinion 
that  we  could,  constitutionally,  make  use  of  the  State  insti- 
tutions as  fiscal  agents.  At  all  events,  he  was  unwilling  to 
call  upon  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  for  an  opinion,  es- 
pecially as  that  opinion  had  already  been  furnished. 

VIVA  VOCE  ELECTIONS. 

On  January  24,  1835,  the  House  having  under  considera- 
tion the  following : 

“Resolved,  That  hereafter,  in  all  elections  made  by  the 
House  of  Representatives  (for  officers),  the  votes  shall  be 
given  viva  voce,  each  member  in  his  place  naming  aloud  the 
person  for  whom  he  votes,” 

Mr.  Fillmore  said : 

This  resolution  seems  to  involve  some  new  and  important 
principles,  and  since  its  introduction,  I have  found  little 
leisure  to  reflect  upon  or  investigate  them.  From  the  little 
consideration,  however,  which  I have  been  able  to  give  this 
subject,  I am  induced  to  believe  that  an  appointing  power, 
vested  in  a legislative  body,  may  be  divided  into  two  kinds. 
One,  is  that  exercised  by  every  legislative  body  in  appoint- 
ing its  own  officers,  whose  power  and  authority  are  limited 
entirely  to  the  body  which  appoints  them,  and  who  exercise 
no  general  jurisdiction  or  authority  whatever  over  the  rights 
of  the  citizen.  The  other  is  that  often  conferred  upon  and 
exercised  by  the  legislature  in  appointing  officers  for  the 
nation  or  State.  The  former  may,  with  equal  propriety,  be 
exercised  either  by  ballot  or  by  an  open  nomination  viva 
voce.  It  partakes  of  the  nature  of  the  sovereign  authority 
of  the  citizen  when  exercising  the  elective  franchise.  In 
my  State,  when  exercised  by  the  citizens  at  large,  it  is  always 


VIVA  VOCE  OR  BALLOT. 


103 


by  ballot;  and  it  is  the  same  in  the  State  Legislature.  We 
elect  our  Speaker  by  ballot,  and  I am  not  aware  that  any 
inconvenience  has  been  found  to  result  from  this  rule,  or 
that  there  has  been  any  attempt  made  to  change  it. 

But  when  the  appointing  power  is  exercised  by  a legisla- 
tive body,  for  the  State  or  nation,  I am  clearly  of  opinion 
that  it  should  always  be  done  by  open  nomination.  It  is 
then  an  exercise  of  delegated  power,  in  which  the  constitu- 
ent is  interested,  and  he  has  a right  to  know  how  the  trust 
has  been  discharged. 

The  appointing  power  which  this  House  can  exercise  is 
entirely  of  the  former  kind.  It  appoints  no  officer  having 
general  authority  over  the  citizen,  and  merely  those  whose 
jurisdiction  is  limited  to  ourselves.  The  words  of  the  Con- 
stitution are:  “The  House  of  Representatives  shall  choose 
their  own  Speaker  and  other  officers.”  Our  power,  then,  is 
limited  to  the  choice  of  a speaker,  clerk,  sergeant-at-arms, 
etc.,  each  and  all  of  whom  are  peculiarly  officers  of  this 
House,  and  not  of  the  nation.  This  will  appear  more  clear, 
and  the  distinction  which  I have  taken  more  palpable,  by 
reference  to  another  part  of  the  Constitution  where  the  ap- 
pointing power  for  officers  of  the  nation  is  expressly  vested 
in  a different  department.  Speaking  of  the  power  of  the 
President,  it  says: 

“He  shall  have  power,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  con- 
sent of  the  Senate,  to  make  treaties,  provided  two-thirds  of 
the  Senators  present  concur.  And  he  shall  nominate,  and,  by 
and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,  shall  appoint 
ambassadors  or  other  public  ministers,  and  consuls,  judges 
of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  all  other  officers  of  the  United 
States,  whose  appointments  are  not  herein  otherwise  pro- 
vided for,  and  which  shall  be  established  by  law.  But  the 
Congress  may  by  law  invest  the  appointment  of  such  infe- 
rior officers  as  they  think  proper  in  the  President  alone,  in 
the  courts  of  law,  or  in  the  Heads  of  Department.” 

Here  the  Constitution  clearly  points  out  the  distinction 
which  I have  taken  between  officers  of  the  United  States, 
and  officers  of  this  House.  The  one  is  to  be  appointed  by 


104 


VIVA  VOCE  OR  BALLOT. 


the  President,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Senate,  and  can  in  no  event  be  appointed  by  this  House.  It 
is  not  even  in  the  power  of  Congress  to  confer  this  power 
upon  the  House.  Congress  may  create  an  office,  and  declare 
its  duties,  and  if  it  be  an  inferior  one,  may  confer  the  ap- 
pointing power  to  fill  it  upon  the  President  alone,  the  courts, 
or  the  heads  of  Department ; but  in  no  event  can  they  confer 
that  power  upon  this  House.  The  Constitution  has  given 
no  such  discretion,  and  our  authority  is  limited  simply  to 
the  appointment  of  officers  for  our  own  body,  and  not,  in  the 
language  of  the  Constitution,  for  the  United  States.  And 
whether  these  officers  of  our  own  body  shall  be  elected  by 
ballot  or  viva  voce , I think  not  very  material.  Unless  there 
be  some  good  reason  for  changing  the  rule  at  this  time,  I 
should  be  disposed  to  let  it  remain  as  it  is. 

But,  sir,  I suppose  the  fact  is  that  this  change  is  to  be 
effected  for  the  purpose  of  having  some  influence  in  the  elec- 
tion or  appointment  of  a printer  to  this  House.  It  can  have 
no  influence  on  any  other  appointment.  All  others,  which 
we  have  the  power  to  make,  are  already  made.  We  may  as 
well,  then,  meet  the  question  fairly,  and  see  whether  the 
resolution  will  reach  this  subject,  and  if  it  will,  whether  we 
have  the  power  to  effect  it. 

The  first  inquiry  is  this : Is  the  printer  to  this  House  an 
officer?  If  he  be  not,  then  the  resolution  will  not  reach  his 
case,  or  affect  the  mode  of  his  appointment.  This  is  rather 
a difficult  question  to  determine,  but  from  the  consideration 
I have  been  able  to  give  the  subject,  I am  inclined  to  think 
that  he  is  not  an  officer,  but  a mere  contractor.  He  takes  no 
oath  of  office.  He  exercises  no  authority,  but  merely  con- 
tracts with  the  Government  to  perform  certain  services,  and 
gives  security  for  their  performance,  and,  if  he  does  not 
comply  with  his  contract,  he  is  liable  to  be  prosecuted  upon 
it,  and  be  compelled  to  respond  in  damages.  But,  perhaps, 
a better  criterion  for  determining  whether  he  is  an  officer 
or  contractor,  is  this:  Can  he  resign?  Every  officer  on 
whom  authority  is  conferred  may  resign  his  office  at  pleas- 
ure and  restore  the  power  to  the  fountain  whence  he  re- 


VIVA  VOCE  OR  BALLOT. 


105 


ceived  it.  Not  so  with  the  contractor — he  has  received  no 
power,  he  has  none  to  resign.  He  has  entered  into  a con- 
tract to  perform  services,  and  must  perform  his  contract  or 
subject  himself  to  a right  of  action  for  a breach  of  it. 

I am  further  confirmed  in  this  opinion  by  a reference  to 
the  joint  resolution  or  law  under  which  this  person  is  ap- 
pointed by  this  House  to  perform  these  services.  That 
resolution  provides  that  in  the  case  the  printer  with  whom 
we  contract  to  do  the  printing  of  this  House  shall  fail  to 
perform  his  contract,  that  then  the  Clerk  of  this  House  may 
employ  another  printer  to  execute  any  portion  of  the  work. 
Now,  if  this  person  be  an  officer,  and  an  officer  of  this 
House,  then  he  must  be  chosen  by  the  House.  The  Consti- 
tution expressly  declares  that  we  shall  choose  our  “Speaker 
and  other  officers”  and  gives  us  no  authority  to  delegate 
this  power  of  choosing  our  officers  to  the  clerk,  or  any  other 
officer  or  department.  But  if  it  be  said  that  he  is  an  officer 
of  the  Nation,  and  not  of  this  House,  then  it  is  equally  clear 
from  that  part  of  the  Constitution  which  I have  read,  that 
we  have  no  power  to  appoint  him.  Congress  itself  could  not 
confer  that  power  upon  us.  The  Constitution  has  expressly 
invested  this  power  of  appointing  “officers  of  the  United 
States”  in  other  departments. 

The  legislative  authority  of  the  nation  has,  by  this  joint 
resolution,  created  us  an  agent  to  contract  with  any  person 
whom  we  shall  designate  by  our  votes  to  do  the  printing  for 
this  House.  This  power  to  make  this  contract  might  have 
been  vested  in  any  other  body  or  officer.  In  a certain  con- 
tingency it  is  now  vested  in  the  Clerk  of  our  House.  Does 
the  Clerk,  when  he  exercises  this  authority,  act  as  an  officer 
of  this  House,  or  as  an  agent  of  the  United  States,  under 
the  authority  conferred  upon  him  by  the  joint  resolution? 
Clearly  in  the  latter  capacity.  As  Clerk  he  is  authorized  to 
make  no  contract.  The  authority  comes  from  both  Houses 
of  Congress  with  the  assent  of  the  President,  and  has  the 
force  and  effect  of  a law.  It  is  the  same  to  him  and  to  us, 
derived  from  the  same  source,  and  might  be  conferred,  as 
well  to  enter  into  a contract  to  build  this  Capitol,  as  to  do 


106 


VIVA  VOCE  OR  BALLOT. 


the  printing  for  this  House;  and  in  my  opinion  the  printer 
is  no  more  an  officer  in  the  one  case  than  the  builder  in  the 
other. 

But  suppose  I am  mistaken  in  this,  and  that  the  Printer  is 
an  officer  of  this  House,  then,  Sir,  by  the  Constitution  we 
can  not  elect  him  for  the  next  Congress.  “Each  House  is 
to  choose  its  own  officers ” The  authority  of  this  House 
will  soon  be  at  an  end,  and  another  is  to  succeed  it.  Can  we 
elect  a Speaker  for  the  next  House,  or  Clerk?  No  one  will 
pretend  it.  And  by  parity  of  reasoning  we  cannot  choose  a 
Printer,  if  he  be  an  officer  of  the  House.  This  question  was 
a good  deal  agitated  last  winter.  It  was  then  said  that  the 
Printer  was  an  officer  of  this  House,  and  that  by  the  Con- 
stitution each  House  was  to  elect  its  own  officers,  and  that, 
therefore,  the  appointment  of  the  Printer  by  the  last  House 
of  Representatives  was  not  binding  upon  us,  and  we  might 
go  on  and  choose  another  for  ourselves.  I have  some  curi- 
osity to  see  how  those  who  maintained  these  doctrines  will 
act  now.  Will  they  be  inclined  to  choose  a Printer  from 
the  next  House  of  Representatives,  and  if  so,  by  what  au- 
thority will  they  do  it  ? Clearly,  they  cannot,  under  the  Con- 
stitution, for  each  House  elects  its  own  officers.  Then  they 
must  under  this  joint  resolution,  and  we  will  look  to  its  pro- 
visions again.  It  was  passed  in  1819,  by  both  Houses  of 
Congress,  and  approved  by  the  President,  and  is,  in  reality, 
a law  of  the  United  States,  so  far  as  it  has  not  been  re- 
pealed. It  first  provides  for  the  form  and  manner  in  which 
the  printing  of  Congress — not  of  this  House — shall  be 
done.  It  then  establishes  the  prices  which  are  to  be  allowed 
for  composition,  and  presswork;  and  then  provides  as  fol- 
lows : 

“That  as  soon  as  this  resolution  shall  have  been  approved 
by  the  President  of  the  United  States,  each  House  shall 
proceed  to  ballot  for  a printer  to  execute  its  work  during 
the  next  Congress ; and  the  person  having  the  greatest  num- 
ber of  votes  shall  be  considered  duly  elected,  and  shall  give 
bond  with  sureties,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Secretary  of 
the  Senate,  the  Clerk  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  re- 


VIVA  VOCE  OR  BALLOT. 


107 


spectively,  for  the  prompt,  accurate,  and  neat  execution  of 
the  work,  and  in  case  any  inconvenient  delay,  should  be  at 
any  time  experienced  by  either  House,  in  the  delivery  of  its 
work,  the  Secretary  and  Clerk,  respectively,  may  be  author- 
ized to  employ  another  printer,”  etc. 

Now,  sir,  it  is  clear  that  this  resolution  can  only  be  altered 
or  repealed  by  an  authority  equal  to  that  which  enacted  it. 
We  cannot,  by  a simple  resolution  of  this  House,  repeal  a 
law  of  Congress.  No  one  will  pretend  this;  and  I find  no 
subsequent  law  or  joint  resolution  altering  the  mode  here 
pointed  out  for  electing  a printer.  This  resolution  declares 
expressly  that  it  shall  be  by  a “ballot”  Can  we  then  say 
that  it  shall  be  viva  voce?  We  must  either  elect  this  person 
under  the  resolution,  by  virtue  of  the  authority  there  con- 
ferred, and  in  the  manner  there  prescribed,  or  else  under 
the  authority  conferred  upon  us  in  the  Constitution  to  elect 
our  own  officers.  If  we  take  the  former,  we  must  pursue 
the  authority  given  to  us.  We  can  no  more  alter  the  mode 
of  executing  that  power  than  we  can  add  to  the  power  itself. 
But  if  we  take  the  latter,  then  we  cannot  elect  at  all.  Each 
House  must  elect  its  own  printer,  and  we  cannot  elect  one 
for  the  House  that  is  to  succeed  us.  So  gentlemen  may 
take  either  horn  of  the  dilemma,  and  I do  not  perceive  that 
the  resolution  under  consideration  is  calculated  to  aid  the 
objects  which  they  have  in  view.  If  we  will  alter  this  mode 
of  appointment,  it  must  be  done  by  a joint  resolution.  It 
cannot  be  done  by  a simple  resolution  of  this  House;  and 
as  that  is  evidently  the  intent,  I shall  be  compelled  to  vote 
against  the  resolution  as  it  now  stands. 


In  this  session  Mr.  Fillmore  participated  in  debate  on 
the  Alabama  two  per  cent,  fund  bill ; on  allowances  to  the 
committee  on  the  post-office;  and  in  a discussion  which 
developed  on  the  presentation  of  a memorial,  signed  by 
citizens  of  Rochester,  praying  Congress  to  abolish  slavery 


108 


ABOLITION  OF  SLAVERY. 


within  the  District  of  Columbia.  Mr.  Fillmore’s  remarks 
on  this  subject,  February  16,  1835,  are  reported  in  abstract: 

ABOLITION  OF  SLAVERY  IN  THE  DISTRICT  OF  COLUMBIA. 

Mr.  Fillmore  said,  as  it  was  understood  that  the  Com- 
mittee on  the  District  of  Columbia  would  not  act  on  this 
subject  at  the  present  session,  it  was  certainly  due  to  the 
petitioners  that  the  motion  which  had  been  made  by  his 
colleague  [Mr.  Dickson]  should  prevail.  It  was  not  un- 
reasonable that  the  memorial  should  be  printed  and  pre- 
served among  the  documents  of  the  House.  He  disavowed, 
most  unequivocally,  now  and  forever,  any  right  on  his  part 
to  interfere  with  the  rights,  or  what  was  termed  the  prop- 
erty, of  the  citizens  of  other  States.  While  he  did  this,  he 
conceived  that,  as  a citizen  of  the  State  of  New  York,  and  a 
member  of  this  House,  he  was  interested  in  the  claim  to 
property  in  man  within  the  District  of  Columbia.  He  re- 
ferred to  the  effect  which  was  produced  in  the  North  by  the 
advertisements  in  the  papers  of  this  city  connected  with  the 
purchase  and  transportation  of  slaves.  The  people  of  that 
section  of  the  country  believed  slavery  to  be  improper,  and 
that  it  should  not  be  tolerated.  This  was  a great  national 
question.  There  was  nothing  in  the  memorial  which  should 
prevent  its  being  printed  and  placed  on  the  files  of  the  House 
for  future  reference.  Whenever  petitions  should  be  pre- 
sented here  from  the  slave-holding  States,  of  a different 
tenor,  and  which  might  advocate  the  establishment  or  con- 
tinuance of  slave  markets  in  this  District  and  city,  if  they 
could  satisfy  the  people  of  other  sections  that  this  was 
proper,  he  would  treat  their  petitions  with  respect.  He  was 
willing  that  each  party  should  be  fully  heard,  and  that 
each  should  have  the  privilege  of  spreading  their  views  be- 
fore the  people  generally. 


SPEECH  ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE 


September  25,  1837,  Mr.  Fillmore  addressed  the  House, 
in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  on  the  bill  to  postpone  the 
fourth  instalment,  opposing  the  measure  on  the  ground  that 
it  impaired  a contract,  and  that  the  condition  of  the  Treasury 
did  not  warrant  it,  or  that  if  it  did,  means  should  be  found, 
either  by  loan,  or  by  withholding  other  appropriations,  to 
comply  with  the  obligations  of  the  deposit  law.  He  doubted 
the  expediency  of  incorporating  a United  States  Bank  as  a 
relief  to  the  financial  situation.  Mr.  Fillmore  said : 

It  is  with  extreme  reluctance  that  I venture  to  throw 
myself  upon  the  indulgence  of  the  committee,  at  this  late 
hour  of  the  day,  and  after  such  a protracted  debate.  But 
it  is  not  my  fault,  sir,  that  I address  you  at  this  time.  I have 
made  every  reasonable  effort,  that  a modest  man  could  make, 
for  some  days,  to  obtain  the  floor;  and  now,  for  the  first 
time,  I have  been  successful.  I am  now  prepared,  notwith- 
standing the  lateness  of  the  hour,  to  offer  what  I have  to  say 
on  this  subject;  but  if  the  committee  prefer  to  rise,  and 
continue  the  discussion  tomorrow,  it  will  suit  me  quite  as 
well.  For  the  purpose  of  testing  the  sense  of  the  committee 
on  that  point,  I will  cheerfully  yield  the  floor  for  a motion 
to  rise.  [A  motion  was  made  to  rise,  which  was  negatived, 
and  Mr.  Fillmore  proceeded.]  I am  content  with  the  deter- 
mination of  the  committee  to  hear  me  tonight. 

What  then,  sir,  is  the  history  of  this  surplus  revenue, 
upon  vdiich  the  bill  upon  your  table  is  to  operate,  and  which 
has  elicited  such  warm  discussion?  It  is  this,  sir — our 
revenue  had  been  graduated  upon  a scale  sufficiently  large, 


109 


110 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


for  many  years,  to  collect  from  the  people,  chiefly  duties,  a 
sum,  which,  together  with  the  moneys  received  from  the 
sale  of  public  lands,  not  only  defrayed  all  the  expenses  of 
Government,  but  left  annually  a large  surplus  to  be  applied 
in  payment  of  the  national  debt.  This  debt,  sir,  which  at 
the  adoption  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  was  upwards  of 
$75,000,000,  had  by  the  operation  of  this  system  been  gradu- 
ally reduced,  so  that  by  1812,  before  the  commencement  of 
the  last  war,  it  was  only  about  $45,000,000.  The  expenses 
of  that  war  again  increased  this  debt,  so  that  in  1816  it  was 
upwards  of  $127,000,000.  A wise  forecast  had  made  ample 
provision  for  its  payment,  and  year  by  year  it  has  lessened, 
until  1834,  when  it  was  finally  extinguished. 

It  was  apparent,  sir,  to  all,  before  this  debt  was  finally 
liquidated,  that  when  that  event  did  occur,  the  same  system 
of  indirect  taxation,  which  could  not  suddenly  be  changed 
without  injury  to  our  manufactures,  must  throw  a large 
amount  of  surplus  revenue  into  the  Treasury.  This  money 
having  been  thus  collected  from  the  people,  or  being  the 
avails  of  the  public  lands,  it  was  thought  no  more  than  rea- 
sonable, as  it  was  not  wanted  for  Government  purposes,  to 
return  it  again  to  the  people,  from  whom  it  had  been  taken, 
and  whose  it  was.  I shall  not  now  stop,  sir,  to  inquire  into 
the  justice  or  constitutionality  of  the  measure.  It  was  clearly 
just.  The  Government  had  this  fund  as  the  agent  of  the 
people.  I hold,  sir,  that  the  Government,  in  all  cases,  is  but 
the  agent  and  instrument  of  the  people,  constituted  to  exe- 
cute their  collective  will. 

To  restore  this  large  amount  of  money  to  the  use  of  those 
from  whom  it  had  been  taken,  with  as  little  injury  as  pos- 
sible to  the  country,  Congress  passed  a law  on  the  26th  day 
of  June,  1836,  by  which  it  was  declared  that  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  should,  on  the  1st  day  of  January,  1837, 
ascertain  how  much  money  there  was  in  the  Treasury,  and 
deduct  from  the  whole  sum  thus  found  $5,000,000,  and  that 
the  remainder  should  be  deposited  with  the  several  States, 
or  such  of  them  as  should  consent  to  receive  the  same,  one- 
fourth  on  each  of  the  1st  days  of  January,  April,  July  and 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


Ill 


October,  in  1837,  upon  the  conditions  prescribed  in  the  act; 
which  were,  that  the  States  should  keep  it  safely,  and  return 
it  again  to  the  United  States,  in  sums  not  exceeding  $10,000 
per  month  from  any  one  State,  and  so  in  the  like  proportion 
from  other  States,  when  wanted  for  the  use  of  the  Govern- 
ment, and  demanded  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  But 
the  Secretary  was  authorized  to  draw  for  $20,000  on  giving 
thirty  days’  notice.  I do  not  pretend,  sir,  to  give  the  words 
of  the  act  verbatim,  as  I have  it  not  before  me,  and  I only 
speak  from  recollection.  But  this  is  the  substance  of  the 
act  of  Congress. 

This,  sir,  was  the  proposition  on  the  part  of  the  United 
States,  of  the  terms  upon  which  they  were  willing  to  deposit 
this  money  with  the  States.  This  too  was  a proposition 
emanating  from  the  highest — nay,  from  all  the  separate — 
Departments  of  this  Government.  It  was  pledging  the  na- 
tional faith  in  the  most  solemn  manner  that  it  could  be 
pledged,  by  a law  which  received  the  assent  of  both  Houses 
of  Congress  and  the  approbation  of  the  President. 

The  State  of  New  York,  by  an  act  of  its  Legislature, 
passed  I think  in  January,  1837,  agreed  to  accept  this  propo- 
sition made  by  the  United  States,  and  to  receive  the  money, 
and  safely  keep  and  return  the  same  when  called  for,  accord- 
ing to  the  terms  of  said  Act  of  Congress ; and  pledged  the 
faith  of  the  State  for  the  faithful  performance  of  these 
acts.  This,  then,  constituted  the  contract  or  compact  be- 
tween the  parties. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  as  directed  by  the  act  of 
Congress,  ascertained  on  the  1st  day  of  January  the  amount 
of  money  in  the  Treasury,  and  after  deducting,  as  he  sup- 
posed, $5,000,000  from  that  sum,  found  there  remained  to 
be  deposited  with  the  States  $37,468,859.97.  I say  as  he 
“supposed,”  sir;  for  it  now  appears  by  his  late  report  to 
this  House,  that  there  was  $1,670,137.52  in  the  Treasury 
(that  is,  sir,  in  the  pet  banks),  on  that  day,  of  which  he  had 
received  no  account.  So  that,  in  reality,  he  reserved 
$6,670,137.52  instead  of  the  $5,000,000,  as  directed  by  the 
Act. 


112 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


Well,  sir,  the  portion  of  this  which  belongs  to  the  State 
of  New  York  by  the  terms  of  the  compact  was  $5,352,694.28, 
three-fourths  of  which  has  been  received  by  that  State ; and 
the  bill  now  on  your  table  proposes  to  postpone  the  payment 
of  the  remaining  $1,338,173.57,  to  which  the  State  will  be 
entitled  on  the  1st  day  of  October  next,  by  the  terms  of 
the  compact. 

Now,  sir,  let  it  be  borne  in  mind  that  this  is  one  entire 
contract,  in  reference  to  one  entire  sum  of  money,  and  that 
it  has  been  partially  performed.  I say,  sir,  the  sum  is  entire. 
Although  it  was  to  be  paid  at  different  times,  yet  the  appro- 
priation was  of  the  entire  sum  that  should  be  found  in  the 
Treasury  on  a certain  day.  That  sum,  when  ascertained  in 
the  manner  prescribed  by  the  act,  was  the  money  set  apart 
for  this  specific  purpose.  It  was  in  legal  intendment  as 
definite  and  fixed  as  though  the  money  had  then  been  counted 
out  at  the  several  banks  where  it  was  deposited  on  that  day, 
and  laid  aside  for  this  object.  True,  it  was  to  be  paid  out  at 
different  times.  But  this  was  to  accommodate  the  banks,  and 
prevent  a derangement  of  the  currency,  and  consequent  dis- 
tress of  the  community, by  calling  for  too  large  sums  at  once. 

But,  Mr.  Chairman,  I am  opposed  to  the  bill  upon  your 
table.  I am  opposed  to  it  first,  sir,  on  the  ground  that  it  is 
hypocritical  and  false  in  its  language.  The  title  of  the  bill 
is  an  “act  to  postpone”  the  payment  of  this  fourth  install- 
ment. This  is  a false  label,  sir,  to  the  door  through  which 
we  are  to  enter  into  the  mysteries  of  this  bill.  But  let  us 
look  to  the  bill  itself.  It  declares  that  the  payment  of  this 
installment  “shall  be  postponed  until  further  provision  by 
law.”  What  is  this  then,  sir,  but  a repeal  of  so  much  of  the 
Act  of  .1836  as  authorizes  the  payment  of  this  fourth  install- 
ment ? It  does  not  merely  postpone  the  payment  to  a definite 
time,  then  to  be  made  without  any  further  legislative  action  ; 
but  postpones  it  until  further  “provision  by  law,”  that  is, 
until  by  a new  law  Congress  shall  direct  this  payment  to  be 
made.  If  this  bill  pass,  nothing  short  of  a new  law  can  ever 
give  this  money  to  the  States.  Then  the  effect  of  this  bill  is 
to  repeal  the  law  of  1836. 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


113 


Why  not  say  so,  then?  Why  profess  to  postpone,  when 
you  absolutely  revoke?  Why  not  call  things  by  their  right 
names?  Is  there  some  iniquity  in  this  transaction  that  it  is 
necessary  to  conceal?  Is  it  intended  to  excite  expectations 
among  the  people  that  are  never  to  be  realized?  Sir,  I dis- 
dain such  a course.  I will  never  give  my  vote  for  a law 
that,  on  its  face,  bears  evidence  of  fraudulent  concealment 
and  hypocritical  designs. 

I am  aware,  sir,  that  an  amendment  has  been  offered  by 
the  gentleman  from  South  Carolina  [Mr.  Pickens],  that,  if 
adopted,  would  obviate  this  objection.  But  as  that  amend- 
ment is  undoubtedly  intended  to  sugar  over  this  nauseous 
pill,  to  make  it  a little  more  palatable  to  some  who  loathe  it 
now,  and  as  I should  still  be  opposed  to  the  bill  if  the  amend- 
ment were  adopted,  for  reasons  which  I shall  hereafter  give, 
I am  inclined  to  let  those  who  are  prepared  to  swallow  any- 
thing, take  the  dose  as  it  is,  and  vote  against  the  amendment 
as  well  as  the  bill.  If  this  money  be  not  now  paid,  I have 
no  idea  that  the  States  will  ever  receive  it.  Let  us  have  it 
now,  according  to  the  promise,  or  tell  us  at  once  that  we 
have  nothing  to  expect.  Do  not  tantalize  us  by  exciting 
further  hopes  that  are  never  to  be  realized. 

But,  sir,  I am  also  opposed  to  the  bill  for  another  reason ; 
and  that  is,  that  this  sudden  change  of  the  destiny  of  near 
ten  millions  of  dollars  is  calculated  still  further  to  derange 
the  currency  and  business  operations  of  the  country  and  add 
to  the  accumulated  distresses  of  the  community  under  which 
they  now  labor.  If  there  be  one  truth,  above  all  others,  well 
settled  in  political  economy,  it  is  this : that  if  you  would 
make  a nation  prosperous  and  happy,  give  them  a uniform 
and  unchangeable  currency.  It  is  as  essential  as  uniformity 
and  stability  in  your  weights  and  measures.  This  currency 
is  the  life-blood  of  the  body  politic.  Its  supply  should  be 
equal  and  uniform.  Every  throb  of  the  heart  is  felt  to  the 
utmost  extremities.  If  the  regular  flow  and  pulsation  fail, 
languor  and  faintness  follow;  but  “over-action,”  as  the 
President  calls  it,  often  produces  instantaneous  paralysis 
and  prostration.  The  political  empirics  have  administered 


114 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE . 


dose  upon  dose,  and  tried  experiment  after  experiment,  until 
the  patient  is  prostrate  and  helpless,  writhing  in  agony,  and 
imploring  for  relief.  If  ever  there  was  a nation  or  an  indi- 
vidual to  whom  that  famous  epitaph  was  peculiarly  appro- 
priate, it  is  this  nation  and  this  administration : 

“I  was  well;  I wished  to  be  better; 

I took  physic,  and  here  I am.” 

I am  opposed  to  this  bill,  sir,  for  another  reason.  Its 
object  and  intent  is  to  violate  the  plighted  faith  of  this 
nation.  I shall  not  enter  into  an  examination  to  see  whether 
the  offer  on  the  part  of  the  United  States,  which  was  acceded 
to  by  the  State  of  New  York,  in  the  manner  that  I have  al- 
ready stated,  was  or  was  not  a pecuniary  contract,  according 
to  the  strict  rules  of  the  common  law,  which  might  be  en- 
forced in  a court  of  justice.  This  point  has  been  most  fully 
and  eloquently  discussed  by  my  colleague  immediately  in 
front  of  me  [Mr.  Sibley].  I could  add  nothing  to  what  he 
has  said  on  that  subject.  It  is  said  that  the  United  States 
have  received  no  consideration  for  the  promise.  But,  sir,  I 
am  disposed  to  place  this  question  upon  higher  grounds. 
Does  it  become  this  nation,  or  the  American  Congress,  to 
stand  here  paltering  about  the  redemption  of  its  plighted 
faith  to  one  of  the  daughters  of  this  Union,  on  the  ground 
that  it  has  received  no  consideration  for  the  promise  which 
it  made?  Has  this  nation  indeed  sunk  so  low,  that  it  takes 
shelter  from  its  engagements,  when  it  finds  it  inconvenient 
to  perform  them,  behind  the  statute  of  frauds?  The  reason 
why  a consideration  is  required  to  enforce  a contract  between 
individuals  does  not  apply  to  this  case.  That  is  a rule 
adopted  by  the  courts,  to  protect  the  inconsiderate  and  the 
unwary  from  the  consequences  of  their  own  folly  in  making 
hasty  promises  without  consideration.  But  even  as  be- 
tween individuals,  if  the  manner  in  which  the  contract  has 
been  made  evinces  a due  degree  of  deliberation,  then  the 
courts  will  enforce  it.  If,  for  instance,  the  contract  be 
sealed,  that  is  regarded  as  a solemn  act,  and  evidences  such 
caution  and  deliberation,  that  the  courts,  by  the  common  law, 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


115 


preclude  all  inquiry  into  the  consideration,  and  compel  the 
obligor  to  perform  his  contract.  This  case  shows  the  reason 
of  the  rule,  and  I submit  that  it  has  no  applicability  here. 
Will  the  gentlemen  say  that  Congress  was  surprised  into 
this  promise?  that  there  was  not  due  deliberation  had  on 
the  subject?  or  that  the  congregated  wisdom  of  this  nation 
requires  such  a miserable  subterfuge  as  this,  to  justify  to  its 
own  conscience  the  violation  of  its  plighted  faith?  Sir,  was 
not  the  contract  sufficiently  solemn  ? It  is  among  the  sacred 
archives  of  your  nation.  It  is  of  the  same  high  and  solemn 
character  with  your  treaties  with  foreign  nations.  Nay,  if 
possible,  sir,  it  is  still  higher,  and  more  obligatory  upon  the 
nation.  A treaty  is  only  sanctioned  by  the  President  and 
Senate.  This,  sir,  has  been  sealed  with  the  national  honor, 
and  attested  by  the  national  faith  of  both  branches  of  Con- 
gress and  the  Executive ; and  you  may  call  it  contract,  com- 
pact, or  treaty,  it  is  clearly  a promise  by  the  nation,  in  the 
most  solemn  form  that  a promise  can  be  made. 

Sir,  have  the  gentlemen  who  are  in  favor  of  this  bill  duly 
reflected  upon  its  nature  and  consequences  ? Have  they  duly 
considered  the  value  of  the  national  honor  ? Would  any  one 
dare  to  make  a proposition  to  break  our  national  faith,  if  it 
had  been  pledged  to  a foreign  power,  as  it  has  been  to  the 
several  States  of  this  Union  ? I trust  not.  Then,  sir,  is  the 
obligation  less  sacred  to  the  various  States  of  this  confed- 
eracy, especially  when  made  for  the  benefit  of  the  people 
themselves,  in  reference  to  their  own  money?  I hope  not. 
But,  sir,  if  we  violate  our  plighted  faith  here,  may  we  not 
do  it  in  other  cases?  Your  pension  laws,  passed  for  the 
relief  of  the  war-worn  veteran  and  the  hardy  mariner, 
promise  to  those  individuals  a mere  gratuity.  It  is  the 
bounty  which  a generous  nation  bestows  upon  its  brave  de- 
fenders. But  it  has  no  elements  of  a pecuniary  contract. 
There  is  no  such  reciprocity  in  those  cases,  as  in  this,  to 
constitute  a contract.  No  promise  or  service  is  required 
from  the  pensioner  as  a quid  pro  quo  for  the  bounty  which 
you  bestow.  But  in  this  case  you  have  required  and  received 
the  plighted  faith  of  the  State  of  New  York  to  receive  this 


116 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


money,  keep  it  safely,  and  repay  it  in  certain  proportions. 
Would  any  member  of  this  House  have  the  hardihood  to 
propose  a bill  to  withhold  the  payment  of  these  pensions, 
and  then  assign  as  a reason  that  there  is  no  valid  contract  for 
paying  them?  I presume  not.  Sir,  there  is  something  of 
more  value  to  a nation  than  money.  It  is  untarnished  honor 
— unbroken  faith.  They  should  be  as  spotless  as  female 
chastity. 

“One  false  step  in  vain  we  may  deplore; 

We  fall  like  stars  that  set  to  rise  no  more.” 

The  reason  why  every  promise  should  be  performed,  is, 
that  it  has  raised  expectations  which  in  justice  ought  not  to 
be  disappointed.  The  whole  business  of  life  is  an  endless 
chain  of  confidence  growing  out  of  these  promises,  express 
or  implied.  And  frequently  the  breaking  of  one  link  sunders 
a thousand. 

“Whatever  link  you  strike, 

Tenth  or  ten-thousandth,  breaks  the  chain  alike.” 

Look  at  its  effects,  in  this  case,  upon  the  single  State  of 
New  York.  That  State,  relying  upon  the  plighted  faith  of 
this  nation,  has  gone  on  and  agreed  to  loan  out  all  this 
money  to  citizens  throughout  the  State,  giving  to  each  town 
and  ward  their  ratable  proportion.  Bonds  and  mortgage^ 
have  been  taken  for  the  whole  amount;  and  the  three- 
fourths  which  has  been  received  by  the  State  from  this  Gov- 
ernment, has  been  paid  over  to  the  borrowers,  and  promises 
in  the  shape  of  certificates  given  to  pay  over  the  remaining 
fourth  on  the  1st  of  October.  The  State  has  relied  upon  the 
promises  of  this  Government  for  the  money  to  pay  these  cer- 
tificates. Now,  sir,  unless  the  money  can  be  raised  in  some 
other  way  by  the  State,  if  this  be  withheld,  all  those  numer- 
ous borrowers  must  be  disappointed.  Those  who  have  strug- 
gled from  day  to  day,  and  from  week  to  week,  to  bear  up 
against  the  pressure  of  the  times,  until  they  could  obtain 
this  pittance  of  relief,  are  to  sink  down  in  utter  despair. 

But,  sir,  what  is  the  difference  between  the  promise  on 
the  part  of  the  State  to  loan  this  money  to  individuals,  and 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


117 


the  promise  on  the  part  of  this  Government  to  deposit  this 
money  with  the  States  ? A deposit  is  a loan ; and  the  person 
with  whom  the  deposit  is  made  becomes  the  borrower,  liable 
to  repay  the  money  according  to  the  terms  agreed.  This 
Government,  then,  has  agreed  to  loan  the  money  to  the  State 
of  New  York;  and  has  taken  the  bond  and  mortgage  of 
that  State,  in  the  shape  of  a solemn  act  of  its  Legislature,  to 
repay  it  on  certain  terms.  The  State  has  agreed  to  loan  the 
same  sum  to  individuals,  and  has  taken  their  bonds  and 
mortgages  for  the  repayment  of  the  same.  Then  if  this 
Government  can  be  justified  in  breaking  this  agreement, 
much  more  will  the  State  of  New  York  be  justified  in  the 
breech  of  the  agreement  to  the  individual  borrowers.  The 
State  may  not  only  plead  the  high  example  of  this  nation 
in  the  breach  of  its  promise,  but  may  urge,  with  perfect  jus- 
tice, that  the  breach  of  faith  by  the  United  States,  on  which 
the  State  had  unfortunately  relied,  had  prevented  the  State 
from  fulfilling  its  engagements. 

Will  any  of  my  colleagues  who  now  urge  a breach  of 
faith  on  the  part  of  the  United  States,  in  withholding  this 
instalment,  say  that  they  believe  that  the  State  of  New  York 
will  be  guilty  of  a similar  breach  to  the  borrowers  of  this 
money?  I know  they  will  not  stain  her  honor  by  such  an 
insinuation.  Then  how  can  they  justify  themselves  to  their 
God  or  their  country,  in  lending  their  votes  or  their  voices 
to  dishoner  this  nation,  in  such  a manner  as  would  be  re- 
garded a reproach  and  disgrace  to  the  State  in  which  we 
live?  I hope  gentlemen  will  pause  and  reflect  before  they 
finally  act. 

But,  sir,  one  of  my  colleagues  [Mr.  Parker]  has  at- 
tempted to  justify  this  breach  of  faith  on  the  part  of  this 
Government,  by  saying  that  the  State  of  New  York  would 
sustain  no  damage,  because  there  was  a large  amount  of 
money  belonging  to  the  canal  fund  of  that  State,  now  on 
deposit  in  the  banks,  drawing  an  interest  to  the  State  of  only 
four  or  five  per  cent.,  and  this  money  could  be  taken  to  make 
up  the  fourth  instalment  of  the  loans  to  individuals ; which 
would  thereby  be  invested  on  interest  at  seven  per  cent.,  and 


118 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


the  State,  instead  of  being  a loser,  would  be  a gainer  of  two 
or  three  per  cent,  per  annum  on  this  money.  Sir,  this  is  not 
a question  of  damages.  It  is  a question  of  national  honor. 
It  is  a question  of  national  faith.  Can  you  measure  the 
value  of  these  by  the  base  standard  of  dollars  and  cents  ? 

But,  sir,  if  this  statement  be  true,  that  this  immense  treas- 
ure belonging  to  the  canal  fund  in  our  State  has  been  for 
years  loaned  to  the  banks  at  four  or  five  per  cent,  interest, 
when  it  could  have  been  loaned  to  the  people  on  bond  and 
mortgage  at  seven  per  cent.,  then  it  does  not  reflect  much 
credit  upon  the  financial  skill  of  those  in  our  own  State  who 
have  had  charge  of  this  fund.  But,  leaving  them  to  the 
tender  mercies  of  their  friends  upon  this  floor,  let  us  see 
whether  my  colleague  is  correct  in  his  inferences.  If  his 
reasoning  be  correct,  the  whole  sum  that  has  been  deposited 
with  the  State  has  been  an  injury  instead  of  a benefit.  This 
must  appear  a strange  paradox  indeed.  The  State  had  it 
from  the  United  States  without  interest,  and  loaned  it  out 
at  seven  per  cent.,  thereby  making  annually  upon  the  whole 
sum  of  $5,352,694  the  no  less  sum  than  $374,688.58,  being 
nearly  four  times  as  much  as  is  annually  distributed  from 
the  State  treasury  for  the  support  of  common  schools  in 
that  great  State,  where  about  500,000  children  are  annually 
educated.  I think  my  honorable  colleague,  on  reviewing  his 
calculation,  will  see  that  he  has  made  a slight  mistake  in 
arriving  at  this  result,  and  that  it  is  somewhat  better  to  have 
money  for  nothing,  than  to  pay  even  four  or  five  per  cent, 
for  it. 

But  if  my  colleague  [Mr.  Foster]  is  right  in  the  construc- 
tion which  he  gives  to  the  Deposit  Act  of  1836,  then  it  is 
equally  clear,  that  in  no  event  is  this  money,  if  once  deposited 
with  the  States,  to  be  repaid  again  to  the  General  Govern- 
ment. I believe  that  no  one  ever  expected  it  would  be  re- 
called. The  money  was  deemed  the  property  of  the  citizens 
of  the  several  States.  It  had  been  collected  from  them  in 
the  shape  of  duties,  or  was  the  avails  of  the  public  lands.  In 
either  case,  if  not  wanted  for  the  uses  of  the  Government,  it 
was  deemed  just  to  return  it  to  the  people,  to  whom  it  be- 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


119 


longed.  To  avoid  constitutional  objections,  the  law  by  which 
this  return  was  made,  was  christened  “a  deposit  act,”  instead 
of  “a  distribution  act.”  But  I care  not  what  form  or  shape 
it  assumes.  Do  justice — restore  the  money  to  whom  it  be- 
longs ; and  let  it  be  appropriated  to  the  sacred  object  of  edu- 
cation— an  object  dear  to  the  heart  of  every  patriot.  If  we 
sue  [ due  economy  here,  our  revenue  is  abundant.  If 

it  is  to  be  squandered,  the  less  there  is,  the  better  for  the 
people. 

Let  my  colleagues  who  believe  in  the  infallibility  of  the 
Argus  listen  to  an  extract  which  I will  read  from  that  paper, 
and  then  vote  against  this  bill.  Remember  that  this  extract 
is  the  honest,  unbiased  opinion  of  that  oracle  of  wisdom,  in 
view  of  an  exhausted  Treasury,  before  party  prejudice 
began  to  operate.  It  is  as  follows : 

“A  remedy  for  any  such  contingency  may  be  provided  by  Con- 
gress by  an  issue  of  Treasury  notes,  or  some  other  expedient  meas- 
ure, that  would  be  less  objectionable  than  any  interference  with 
the  arrangements  made  with  the  States  for  the  disposition  of  the 
surplus.” 

Sir,  we  are  told  that  this  bill  should  pass,  because  there  is 
no  money  in  the  Treasury  to  make  the  payment.  This,  then, 
is  a distinct  admission  that  your  Treasury  is  bankrupt.  Yes, 
sir,  in  less  than  one  short  year  from  the  time  this  Govern- 
ment, through  all  its  official  organs,  and  its  hundred  presses, 
was  boasting  of  its  wealth  and  prosperity,  with  an  overflow- 
ing Treasury,  and  no  national  debt,  it  now  comes  like  an 
humble  suppliant  to  the  Representatives  of  the  people,  and 
says  it  is  bankrupt,  and  cannot  pay.  If  the  Treasury  be 
empty,  why  pass  this  law  ? Will  it  withhold  what  you  have 
not  got?  Will  it  postpone  what  does  not  exist?  Our  legis- 
lation seems  to  be  a work  of  supererogation.  It  is  making 
laws  for  a nonentity.  But  some  say  we  should  pass  the  law 
as  a direction  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  Why  pass 
it  for  him?  He  is  not  bound  to  furnish  the  money,  if  it 
does  not  exist.  His  duty  is  discharged,  if  he  pays  it  over 
when  we  provide  it.  But,  sir,  we  have  passed  one  law,  dis- 


120 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


tinctly  appropriating  this  identical  money  then  in  the  Treas- 
ury, to  this  object,  and  directing  him  to  pay  it  over.  Why 
has  he  not  obeyed  that  law,  and  kept  the  money  to  be  applied 
to  this  object?  He  had  no  authority  to  take  this  and  apply 
it  to  any  other  purpose.  The  act  was  imperative,  that  the 
identical  money  in  the  Treasury  on  the  ist  day  of  January 
last  should  be  deposited  with  the  States.  I think,  sir,  instead 
of  attempting  to  legalize  this  breach  of  trust  on  the  part  of 
the  Secretary  in  using  this  money,  not  only  without  law,  but 
against  law,  we  had  better  institute  an  inquiry  into  his  con- 
duct for  laying  his  hands  upon  this  sacred  treasure,  and  see 
if  he  has  any  justification. 

But  is  the  pretence  true,  that  the  money  is  not  in  the 
Treasury?  This  seems  to  be  a difficult  question  to  answer. 
I shall  not  venture  into  that  labyrinth  of  mysteries,  the  Sec- 
retary’s report.  The  bewildered  senses  and  contradictory 
reports  of  those  who  have  attempted  to  pass  through  its 
intricate  windings  and  involutions,  admonish  me  to  beware 
how  I venture.  No  two  have  been  able  to  agree  as  to  what 
they  saw  there.  Some  saw  treasure ; others  saw  nothing 
but  “confusion  worse  confounded,”  and  in  this  state  of  doubt 
and  uncertainty  it  becomes  us  to  inquire  if  there  be  no  collat- 
eral aid,  by  the  light  of  which  the  mysteries  of  this  report 
may  be  unravelled.  In  the  absence  of  positive  proof,  let  us 
look  at  probabilities.  The  last  Administration  professed  to 
be  one  of  “retrenchment  and  reform”;  and  the  present 
Executive  has  declared  that  he  intends  “to  follow  in  the  foot- 
steps of  his  illustrious  predecessor.”  We  have,  therefore,  a 
right  to  expect,  and  the  people  did  expect,  economy  in  both. 
Have  they  been  deceived  ? Has  this  “promise  been  made  to 
the  ear  and  broken  to  the  hope”?  Have  these  professions, 
that  elevated  the  present  dynasty  to  power,  been  hollow  and 
hypocritical  ? Let  us  look  at  the  facts,  and  see  how  the  mat- 
ter stands,  if  the  Treasury  be  now  bankrupt,  as  is  alleged  by 
those  in  this  House  who  support  the  Administration. 

From  a careful  examination  of  the  expenses  of  this  Gov- 
ernment for  twelve  years,  that  is,  from  1819  to  1833,  ex- 
clusive of  the  national  debt,  I find  that  they  averaged  about 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


121 


$13,000,000  per  year.  I give  them  in  tabular  form  as  fol- 
lows, from  the  best  estimates  I can  make : 

Y„„_  Expenses  of  Whole  amount  Average  per  Whose 

*ear  Government  for  four  years  year  Administration 

1822  $ 6,534,394  09 

1823  9,784,154  50 

1824  10,328,141  71 

1825  11,490,459  94  $38,137,150  33  $ 9,534,287  58  Mr.  Monroe 


1826  13,062,316  27 

1827  12,653,095  65 

1828  13,296,041  00 

1829  12,659,490  62  51,670,943  54  12,917,735  88  Mr.  Adams 


1830  13,229,533  33 

1831  13,864,067  90 

1832  16,516,388  77 

1833  22,713,355  11  66,323,745  11  16,580,936  28  Gen.  Jackson 

Average  expenditure  for  the  whole  twelve  years,  $13,010,903.25. 

Now,  sir,  let  us  see  what  money  has  been  received  into 
the  Treasury  since  the  1st  day  of  January,  1835,  and  then 
we  may  form  some  conjecture  whether  there  is  any  there 
now ; or  at  all  events,  we  and  the  people  may  know  whether 
this  and  the  last  administration  have  been  economical  in  the 
use  of  the  people’s  money,  or  whether  they  have  squandered 
it  with  a profusion  and  extravagance  never  before  equalled. 

There  was  received  into  the  Treasury,  during  the  years 
1835  and  1836,  together  with  what  there  was  in  the  Treasury 

on  the  1st  day  of  January,  1835 $ 88,461,942  04 

And  during  the  first  half  of  the  present  year  13,687,182  00 
And  if  we  estimate  the  receipts  of  the  pres- 
ent quarter,  ending  on  the  1st  of  October,  at 
one-third  of  those  for  the  first  half  of  the 
present  year,  they  are 4,562,394  00 

, Making  a total  amount  of $106,711,518  04 

Deduct  from  this  the  amount  deposited  with 
the  United  States,  being  the  first  three  in- 
stalments   28,101,644  99 


And  it  leaves  no  less  than 


$ 78,609,863  05 


122 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


applicable  to  the  ordinary  expenses  of  Government,  which 
has  been  poured  into  your  Treasury  within  two  years  and 
three- fourths,  averaging  nearly  $29,000,000  per  year. 
Where  is  it,  sir?  The  empty  vaults  of  your  Treasury  echo, 
Where  ? I will  tell  you,  sir,  where  it  is.  It  has  been  wasted, 
squandered,  and  profusely  lavished  upon  party  favorites  and 
parasites;  and  the  people,  from  whose  hard  earnings  you 
collected  it,  are  now  to  be  cheated  out  of  it.  Sir,  the  people 
will  look  into  this  matter.  They  will  scrutinize  this  un- 
paralleled profligacy  of  their  public  servants ; and  in  making 
up  their  minds,  they  will  not  forget  that  all  these  extrava- 
gancies have  been  the  bitter  fruits  of  an  administration  in 
both  Houses  of  Congress,  and  constantly  uttering  the  hypo- 
critical cry  of  “retrenchment  and  reform” ! 

Sir,  there  is  one  more  proof  that  the  money  is  in  the 
Treasury,  notwithstanding  we  are  told  that  it  is  not,  by  the 
Chairman  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  [Mr. 
Cambreleng],  which  I hope  will  be  entirerly  satisfactory  to 
him  and  the  Administration  members  of  this  committee ; 
and  that  is,  the  statement  of  the  President  himself  in  his 
message.  I will  read  it : 

“There  are  now  in  the  Treasury  $9,367,214  directed  by  the  act 
of  23d  of  June,  1836,  to  be  deposited  with  the  States  in  October 
next.” 

These,  sir,  are  the  words  of  the  Message  itself.  To  those 
who  credit  the  veracity  of  their  author,  I hope  they  will  be 
satisfactory.  They  are  too  explicit  to  admit  of  doubt  or  to 
require  comment. 

But,  sir,  my  chief  objection  is  this,  and  all  the  other 
measures  recommended  in  the  President’s  message,  and  pro- 
posed by  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  is,  that  they 
hold  out  no  prospect  of  permanent  relief  to  the  country. 
True,  sir,  the  issuing  of  Treasury  notes,  on  which  you  are 
to  borrow  money  to  replenish  your  exhausted  Treasury, 
may  afford  a little  temporary  relief  to  those  who  owe  the 
Government,  and  indirectly  to  the  community;  and  the  ex- 
tension of  time  for  the  payment  of  the  merchant’s  bonds  to 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


123 


the  Government  will  afford  present  relief  to  that  class  of 
citizens,  or  enable  them  “to  put  off  the  evil  day”  a little 
longer.  But  these  are  mere  expedients,  temporary  and  par- 
tial in  their  operation,  and  do  not  reach  the  seat  of  the  dis- 
ease that  now  afflicts  the  body  politic.  That  disease,  sir, 
had  its  origin  in  the  derangement  of  our  currency ; and  that 
derangement,  in  my  opinion,  was  produced  by  the  unwise 
conduct  of  this  Government.  I will  not  charge  this  Admin- 
istration with  a design  to  bring  all  these  evils  upon  us.  But 
I do  charge  them  with  an  unholy  ambition  that  grasped  at 
power,  regardless  of  the  means  by  which  it  was  attained; 
with  a war  upon  the  United  States  Bank,  for  political  effect ; 
and  with  enlisting  and  arraying  against  that  institution  all 
the  feelings  of  rivalry  and  avarice  on  the  part  of  the  State 
banks,  and  of  jealousy  and  distrust  on  the  part  of  the  peo- 
ple; and  that  a consequence  of  this  war  has  been,  all  the 
evils  of  over-banking,  over-trading,  and  ruinous  and  gam- 
bling speculation  described  in  the  Message,  and  the  final 
depreciation  and  derangement  of  the  currency,  and  the 
bankruptcy  of  the  Government  and  people. 

Let  me  not  be  misunderstood  in  what  I am  about  to  say. 
I have  never  been  a particular  friend  of  the  United  States 
Bank.  I regard  it  as  I do  all  other  banks,  as  a necessary  evil. 
I have  never  been  its  advocate,  and  am  not  now.  It  has  gone 
down  to  “the  tomb  of  the  Capulets” ; let  it  rest  in  peace. 
And  I should  have  great  doubts  of  the  expediency  of  estab- 
lishing a new  United  States  Bank  at  this  time,  for  the  relief 
of  the  community.  I fear  that  an  attempt  to  put  it  in  opera- 
tion would  rather  aggravate  than  mitigate  our  sufferings. 
But  on  this  point  it  is  not  necessary  to  express  an  opinion. 
I only  allude  to  it,  to  prevent  any  improper  inference,  and 
that  the  committee  may  understand  that  all  I have  to  say  of 
the  United  States  Bank  is  as  a matter  of  history,  and  not  of 
opinion  as  to  its  expediency  or  usefulness  at  this  time. 
Times  have  essentially  changed ; and  what  might  have  been 
proper  or  useful  then,  may  be  wholly  improper  and  useless 
now.  Then,  such  a bank,  with  the  confidence  of  the  Gov- 
ernment and  people,  might  be  useful  in  regulating  the  cur- 


124 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


rency.  Since  the  war  upon  that  institution,  banks  have  mul- 
tiplied beyond  all  former  example.  To  add  another  at  this 
time,  and  collect  together  the  requisite  specie  to  put  it  in 
operation,  would,  I fear,  add  greatly  to  our  present  em- 
barrassment. People  must  learn  from  actual  suffering  that 
it  is  much  more  easy  to  tear  down  than  to  build  up,  to 
destroy  than  to  create,  and  to  derange  than  to  restore. 
Ignorance  and  folly  may  accomplish  the  one ; wisdom,  pru- 
dence, and  time  can  alone  perform  the  other. 

But,  sir,  I said  I was  opposed  to  these  measures  because 
they  promised  no  permanent  relief  to  the  country.  Why  has 
the  President,  after  witnessing  the  suffering  of  this  com- 
munity— after  calling  us  together,  as  every  one  supposed, 
to  propose  some  measure  of  relief — turned  thus  coldly  away, 
without  recommending  anything  to  restore  a uniform  cur- 
rency? Are  the  prayers,  and  tears,  and  groans,  of  a whole 
nation,  suffering  all  the  horrors  of  impending  bankruptcy, 
not  worthy  of  his  consideration?  Are  members  of  the 
Administration  prepared  to  return  and  look  their  constitu- 
ents in  the  face,  without  making  one  effort  for  the  relief  of 
the  country?  We  of  the  minority  can  do  nothing.  We  are 
powerless.  But  you  have  all  power.  Then  why  not  exert  it 
to  bring  back  the  days  of  prosperity  and  sunshine  that 
existed  before  this  fatal  war  upon  the  currency,  and  com- 
merce, and  business  of  our  country  ? 

Sir,  do  the  President,  and  those  who  support  him,  expect 
to  find  a justification  for  the  apathy  they  manifest  towards 
a suffering  country,  by  charging  all  our  distresses  to  the 
follies  and  extravagance  of  the  community,  and  by  care- 
fully concealing  everything  which  shows  that  those  very 
follies  and  that  very  extravagance,  which  are  held  up  for 
universal  reprobation  in  the  President’s  message,  had  their 
origin  in  the  wickedness  or  folly  of  this  Government?  So 
it  would  seem.  The  President,  after  adverting  to  the  dis- 
tresses and  embarrassments  of  the  country  in  his  Message, 
says: 

“The  history  of  trade  in  the  United  States  for  the  last  three  or 
four  years  affords  the  most  convincing  evidence  that  our  present 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


125 


condition  is  chiefly  to  be  attributed  to  over-action  in  all  the  depart- 
ments of  business ; an  over-action  deriving,  perhaps,  its  first  impulses 
from  antecedent  causes,  but  stimulated  to  its  destructive  conse- 
quences by  excessive  issues  of  bank  paper,  and  by  other  facilities  for 
the  acquisition  and  enlargement  of  credit.” 

Sir,  I agree  with  him,  that  excessive  issues  of  bank  paper 
have  stimulated  to  destructive  consequences.  Of  this  fact 
there  can  be  no  doubt ; and  it  is  a precious  confession  from 
the  head  of  that  party  that,  for  years  past,  have  wielded  the 
legislative  power  of  this  nation,  and  also  the  legislative 
power  of  most  of  the  States  in  this  Union,  and  constantly 
charged  their  opponents  with  being  the  bank  party.  I say, 
sir,  this  is  a precious  confession  from  the  head  of  that  party, 
that  banks  have  been  multiplied  by  this  no-bank  party,  until 
their  “excessive  issues  have  produced  destructive  conse- 
quences.” If  it  were  decorous  to  the  Chief  Magistrate,  I 
would  ask  if  ever  such  shameless  hypocrisy,  when  exposed, 
was  met  by  such  unblushing  impudence? 

But,  sir,  what  are  those  “antecedent  causes”  that  gave  the 
“first  impulse  to  this  over-action”  ? Why  are  they  concealed 
from  the  people  ? They  are  the  true  causes  of  all  our  suffer- 
ing; and,  sir,  let  me  tell  you,  they  had  their  origin  in  the 
war  against  the  United  States  Bank.  That  was  to  be  put 
down;  and,  to  effect  that  object,  and  reward  the  pure  pa- 
triotism of  this  no-bank  party,  new  State  banks  were  char- 
tered. Let  us  look  at  facts.  In  1830,  all  the  banks  in  the 
United  States  were  only  320.  They  have  been  increased  in 
seven  years  to  677,  and  146  branches,  making  in  all  823 
banks!  The  capital  of  all  the  banks  (January  1,  1830)  was 
$145,192,268.  It  has  been  increased  in  seven  years  to 
$378>7i9>i68.  Add  to  this  the  $40,000,000  of  surplus  rev- 
enue that  has  been  bestowed  on  the  pet  banks  since  1833, 
when  the  deposits  were  removed  from  the  United  States 
Bank,  and  you  have  the  antecedent  causes  that  stimulated  to 
that  over-action,  and  those  destructive  consequences,  men- 
tioned by  the  President.  And  all  these,  sir,  are  chiefly 
chargeable  to  the  dominant  party  in  these  United  States. 
They  removed  these  deposits  without  law,  and  gave  them 


126 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


to  the  pet  banks.  They  invited  these  pet  banks  to  extend 
their  accommodations.  They  have  created  nearly  three  times 
as  much  banking  capital  in  the  United  States,  since  General 
Jackson  came  into  office,  as  all  that  existed  before.  Yes, 
sir,  as  strange  as  it  may  appear,  this  no-bank  party,  that  has 
for  seven  years  cried  out  against  the  bank  monster,  until 
the  people  trembled  for  their  liberties,  have,  within  the  same 
time,  created  nearly  three  times  as  much  bank  capital  as  all 
that  existed  in  the  United  States  before.  Was  there  ever 
such  unparalleled  hypocrisy? 

But,  sir,  this  war  against  the  United  States  Bank,  got  up 
for  political  effect,  regardless  of  the  peace  of  society  or  the 
interests  of  the  country,  was  made  to  unite  the  extremes  of 
society.  The  more  intelligent  of  the  middle  class  never 
engaged  in  it ; or  were  drawn  into  it,  from  political  associa- 
tions, with  reluctance.  It  was  really  a war  of  the  State  banks 
against  the  United  States  Bank,  got  up  by  artful  politicians 
to  elevate  Mr.  Van  Buren  to  the  Presidency.  They  tempted 
the  cupidity  of  the  thousand  officers  and  stockholders  inter- 
ested in  these  banks,  with  the  bribe  of  the  public  deposits 
and  the  prospect  of  destroying  a hated  rival  that  kept  them 
in  check,  and  loaned  money  at  six  per  cent.  It  w^s  a Shy- 
lock  feeling  of  avarice  and  revenge.  On  the  other  hand,  all 
the  affiliated  presses  connected  with  these  State  banks  cried 
out  against  the  monster,  until  the  more  ignorant  part  of  the 
community  thought  their  liberties  in  danger,  and  joined  the 
strong  bank  party  against  the  weaker,  to  put  down  the 
United  States  Bank.  Having  effected  this,  and  brought  the 
country  to  the  verge  of  ruin,  and  overwhelmed  these  State 
banks  with  infamy  and  disgrace,  is  it  strange  that  the  same 
unprincipled  course  should  be  pursued  against  them,  that 
has  been  pursued  against  the  United  States  Bank?  It  is 
what  they  had  a right  to  expect.  It  is  but  “commending  the 
poisoned  chalice  to  their  own  lips.”  We  may  pity  their 
folly;  we  may  condemn  the  heartless  perfidy  that  first  se- 
duced them  from  their  duty,  and  prostituted  them  to  the 
vilest  purposes  of  partisan  warfare,  until  their  infamy  has 
rendered  them  useless,  and  now  casts  them  aside;  but  we 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


127 


cannot  deny  that  the  retributive  hand  of  justice  is  seen  in 
their  sufferings. 

Sir,  in  corroboration  of  what  I have  said  about  this  being 
a war  of  the  State  banks  against  the  United  States  Bank, 
got  up  by  designing  politicians,  I will  mention  a few  facts 
connected  with  a little  secret  history  on  this  subject  in  my 
own  State. 

It  is  known,  sir,  that  we  have  a peculiar  system  of  bank- 
ing in  the  State  of  New  York,  called  the  safety-fund  system. 
It  had  its  origin  with  Mr.  Van  Buren,  when  Governor  of 
that  State  in  1829.  Although  he  did  not  claim  the  merit  of 
an  original  inventor,  yet  he  adopted  it  as  his  own,  and  recom- 
mended it  to  the  Legislature.  This  system,  sir,  establishing 
a community  of  interest  between  banks,  and  being  under  the 
immediate  supervision  of  three  bank  commissioners,  is  ad- 
mirably well  calculated  for  use  as  a political  engine.  It  was 
no  sooner  put  into  operation,  than  it  was  brought  to  bear 
upon  the  Legislature  of  that  State.  In  1830  or  1831,  while  I 
was  honored  with  a seat  in  the  Legislature  of  that  State, 
resolutions  were  introduced  in  that  body  against  a recharter 
of  the  United  States  Bank.  These  resolutions  originated 
with  the  banks  in  that  State.  Not  one  solitary  petition  from 
the  people  on  that  subject  had  been  presented  to  the  Legis- 
lature. The  bank  then  had  three  branches  in  that  State: 
one  at  New  York,  one  at  Utica,  and  one  at  Buffalo ; and  the 
people  were  contented  with  the  currency  which  they  fur- 
nished. No  murmur,  no  complaint,  was  heard  from  the 
people.  But,  sir,  day  by  day,  as  these  resolutions  were  under 
discussion  in  that  Legislature,  the  birds  of  ill-omen,  that 
deal  in  bank  stock,  hovered  round  that  hall,  and  watched  the 
progress  of  this  unholy  proceeding  with  an  intense  anxiety. 
But  no  farmers,  no  mechanics,  were  there.  They  had  not 
been  consulted;  they  took  no  interest  in  the  proceeding. 
They  had  no  share  at  that  time  in  this  conspiracy  of  the 
State  banks  against  their  interest.  They  were  delving  at 
their  labor,  and  slumbering  in  security,  while  these  banks 
were  forging  the  chains  with  which  they  have  since  bound 
them.  Yes,  sir,  I was  informed,  and  I believe  it,  that  nightly, 


128 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


during  the  discussion  of  those  resolutions,  their  supporters 
in  the  Legislature  met  in  conclave,  in  one  of  the  principal 
banks  in  that  city,  to  devise  ways  and  means  to  carry  them 
through.  They  were  carried.  These  banks,  with  the  aid  of 
the  party  screws,  proved  too  powerful  for  the  independence 
and  honesty  of  that  body ; and  the  result  was  proclaimed  as 
the  sense  of  the  people  of  that  great  State  against  the  United 
States  Bank.  This  State  bank,  sir,  had  its  reward — it  shared 
the  spoils. 

But,  sir,  my  colleague  [Mr.  Foster]  has  taken  occasion  to 
eulogize  this  safety-fund  system.  He  says  it  works  like  a 
charm.  I shall  not  deny,  sir,  that  it  has  some  good  qualities ; 
but  I am  far  from  thinking  it  so  charming  as  my  honorable 
colleague.  I doubt  not  it  appears  so  to  many  who  share  in 
its  golden  harvests,  and  enjoy  its  exclusive  privileges;  but 
to  the  great  majority  of  the  people,  who,  like  myself,  deal 
not  in  bank  stock,  but  occasionally  see  or  feel  the  tyranny  of 
these  little  monsters,  the  working  of  this  political  engine  is 
anything  but  charming.  Sir,  I conceive  it  had  its  origin  in 
the  foul  embraces  of  political  ambition,  and  cunning,  heart- 
less avarice.  “It  was  conceived  in  sin,  and  brought  forth  in 
iniquity.”  It  has  spread  its  baleful  influence  over  that 
State,  corrupting  the  fountains  of  power,  and  demoralizing 
the  whole  community,  by  the  manner  in  which  its  privileges 
have  been  granted  and  its  stocks  distributed.  Banks  have 
been  granted,  and  the  stocks  distributed,  to  party  favorites, 
as  a reward  for  party  services.  They  have  been  the  mer- 
cenary bribe  offered  to  the  community  to  sap  the  foundations 
of  moral  honesty  and  political  integrity. 

But  I will  not  enter  into  the  disgusting  details.  As  to 
those  who  wish  to  see  the  workings  of  this  charming  system 
of  my  colleague,  I will  refer  them  to  an  examination  of  our 
State  Legislature  last  winter,  and  the  proceedings  of  that 
body  upon  the  report  of  their  committee  upon  a single  bank. 
I believe  the  very  day  on  which  the  report  was  made,  it 
showed  such  abominable  corruption  and  abuses,  that  a bill 
was  introduced  to  repeal  its  charter,  and,  within  one  or  two 
days,  passed  through  all  the  forms  of  legislation  in  the  popu- 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


129 


lar  branch  without  a dissenting  vote;  and  also  passed  the 
Senate  with  but  three  or  four  votes  against  it. 

Does  my  honorable  colleague  think  that  a system  which 
produces  banks  like  this,  works  like  a charm?  I perceive 
that  this  incestuous  connection  between  the  politics  and 
banks  of  that  State  has  been  festering  and  corrupting  until 
it  is  about  to  fall  asunder  from  its  own  rottenness.  I,  for 
one,  have  no  tears  to  shed  at  the  dissolution.  I only  regret 
that  many  of  these  banks,  since  they  were  chartered,  have 
passed  into  the  hands  of  honest  and  honorable  men.  I fear 
that  the  odium  which  rests  upon  this  corrupt  system,  and 
which  in  my  opinion,  is  nowise  necessarily  connected  with 
banking,  will  sink  the  whole,  without  discrimination.  The 
vengeance  of  an  insulted  and  oppressed  community  is  ter- 
rible and  overwhelming  in  its  course.  It  stops  not  always 
to  discriminate  between  the  just  and  the  unjust,  between  the 
proper  use  and  the  improper  abuse  of  a particular  system; 
but,  in  the  wild  madness  of  popular  fury,  they  hurl  the  whole 
to  destruction.  I warn  them  to  stay  their  desolating  hands. 
All  sudden  changes  are  dangerous.  Let  us  not  destroy,  but 
purify  this  odious  system.  We  cannot  live  without  banks 
and  banking.  Credit  in  some  shape  is  indispensable  to  our 
prosperity.  Were  we  reduced  to  a specie  circulation,  as  now 
proposed  by  the  President,  property  would  not  be  worth 
twenty-five  per  cent,  what  it  now  is,  and  would  soon  be 
wholly  absorbed  by  the  wealthy  capitalists  of  our  country. 
The  debtor  part  of  the  community  would  be  utterly  ruined. 
Then  let  us  purge  this  vile  system  of  its  corruptions  and 
abuses,  and  strip  it  of  its  odious  monopoly,  and  open  the 
privilege  of  banking  to  all  who  comply  with  such  prescribed 
rules  of  the  Legislature  as  secure  the  bill-holder  and  public 
generally  from  fraud  and  imposition.  I hope,  sir,  to  live  to 
see  the  day  when  this  shall  be  done,  and  the  moral  pestilence 
of  political  banks  and  banking  shall  be  unknown. 

[Mr.  Fillmore  here  went  into  an  examination  to  show 
that  the  pretence  in  the  Message,  that  there  had  been  the 
same  over-banking  and  over-trading  in  England  as  in  this 


130 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


country,  was  not  true.  He  exhibited  tables  that  show  the 
following  results : 


October  i,  1833,  circulation  of  the  Bank  of  England $19,800,000 

December  27,  1836,  circulation  of  the  Bank  of  England. . . 17,300,000 

December  28,  1833,  circulation  of  all  the  banks  in  England 

and  Wales 27,621,104 

June  25,  1836,  circulation  of  all  the  banks  in  England  and 

Wales  29,386,196 


Mr.  Fillmore  then  spoke  of  the  hostility  of  the  Adminis- 
tration to  the  deposit  law,  and  its  attempts,  by  means  of  the 
specie  circular  and  transfer  drafts,  to  oppress  the  banks,  and, 
through  them,  the  people,  and  render  the  law  odious;  and 
that  the  last  effort  was  to  declare  the  Treasury  bankrupt, 
and  withhold  the  funds. 

He  then  exhibited  a statement  showing  that  the  banks  in 
the  State  of  New  York  had  as  follows: 

In  circulation  Specie  Discounts 

January  1,  1837 $24,198,000  $6,557,020  $79,313,188 

September  1,  1837 13,740,318  2,747,642  59,367,815 

Reduced  in  8 months $10,457,682  $3,809,378  $19,945,373 


September  1,  1837,  United  States  deposits $ 728,571 

September  1,  1837,  individual  deposits 15,134,968 


Now,  sir,  it  appears  from  these  facts  that  the  banks  in  the 
State  of  New  York,  in  eight  months,  have  reduced  their 
discounts  one-fourth;  their  circulation  nearly  one-half;  and 
their  specie  almost  two-thirds.  The  people  of  that  State  are 
literally  gasping  for  breath,  like  an  animal  under  the  ex- 
hausted receiver  of  the  experimentalist.  And  if  you  pass 
this  bill,  you  authorize  the  United  States  to  take  all  but 
$2,000,000  of  the  specie  now  remaining  in  that  great  State, 
and  lock  it  up  in  your  vaults  of  this  new  sub-treasury  sys- 
tem. And  you  leave  the  bill-holders  and  individual  deposit- 
ors of  that  State  with  upwards  of  $25,000,000  due  them 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


131 


from  the  banks,  and  only  $2,000,000  of  specie  to  pay  them 
with. 

Sir,  however  solvent  these  banks  may  be,  it  is  impossible 
that  they  should  ever  resume  specie  payments  under  circum- 
stances like  these.  This  sub-treasury  scheme,  which  I regard 
as  a germ  of  a Treasury  bank,  will  draw  the  specie  from 
our  banks  faster  than  they  can  collect  it.  The  Post  Office 
now  acts  as  an  absorbent  of  all  the  small  change  in  the  coun- 
try. Where  the  edict  of  the  officer  at  the  head  of  that 
Department  is  faithfully  executed,  all  the  specie  is  gathered 
into  the  Post  Office,  paid  out  to  the  mail  contractors,  and  by 
them  sold  to  the  brokers,  by  whom  it  is  sold  as  a commodity, 
and  shipped  out  of  the  country.  In  this  way  it  daily  grows 
more  and  more  scarce,  and  has  almost  ceased  to  be  used  as 
a circulating  medium  among  the  people.  This  sub-treasury 
system  is  calculated  to  carry  out  this  infamous  distinction 
between  the  Government  and  the  people — to  absorb  all  the 
specie  for  the  use  of  the  Government  and  its  favorites,  and 
leave  the  people  to  irredeemable  bank  paper,  and  this  bill, 
with  the  bankrupt  law  recommended  by  the  President,  is 
calculated  to  take,  “peaceably  if  they  can,  but  forcibly  if 
they  must,”  all  the  specie  from  the  banks,  and  hoard  it  up 
for  the  use  of  the  office-holders  under  this  Government.  Sir, 
there  are  evils  between  which  a man  is  not  bound  to  choose ; 
he  may  reject  both.  And  I regard  this  sub-treasury  system, 
and  the  union  of  the  Government  with  the  State  banks,  as 
evils  of  this  character.  I will  not  choose ; I am  opposed  to 
both. 

But  have  my  colleagues,  who  profess  to  be  the  guardians 
of  these  State  banks,  who  call  themselves  “conservatives,” 
duly  considered  the  awful  precipice  upon  which  we  stand  in 
the  State  of  New  York?  Are  you  willing,  instead  of  adding 
$I>300’000  to  our  circulation  in  this  time  of  distress,  to  pass 
this  bill,  and  thereby  not  only  withhold  that,  but  take  from 
us  the  $700,000  now  there  in  specie?  Recollect  that  all  our 
safety-fund  banks  are  incorporated  under  a law  that  de- 
clares that  they  shall  be  deemed  insolvent,  and  their  charters 
dissolved  by  the  Court  of  Chancery,  if  they  neglect,  for 


132 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


ninety  days  after  demand,  to  redeem  any  evidence  of  debt 
issued  by  them  in  specie.  The  effect  of  that  law  has  been 
suspended  for  one  year,  and  for  one  year  only,  from  the  nth 
day  of  May  last.  It  will  then  expire  by  its  own  limitation, 
and  can  then  only  be  renewed  by  the  concurrence  of  each 
branch  of  the  Legislature.  Is  there  not  much  reason  to 
doubt  whether  this  law  will  be  extended?  It  was  passed  in 
a moment  of  alarm,  when  the  cry  of  bankruptcy  and  ruin 
broke  upon  the  astonished  ear  of  the  Legislature  like  a peal 
of  thunder  from  a cloudless  sky.  But  they  and  the  people 
have  since  had  time  to  reflect.  This  is  a state  of  things  that 
cannot  be  endured,  and  most  of  the  measures  here  recom- 
mended are  calculated  to  aggravate  it  in  a tenfold  degree. 
Men  become  desperate,  and  already  the  deep  sea  of  popular 
commotion  begins  to  heave  its  rising  billows.  I confess  I 
watch  its  motions  with  solicitude  and  alarm.  And  I have 
been  surprised  to  find,  in  the  papers  of  the  day,  a letter  from 
General  Jackson,  the  former  patron  and  eulogist  of  these  pet 
banks,  speaking  of  them  in  the  following  language : 

“The  history  of  the  world  has  never  recorded  such  base  treachery 
and  perfidy  as  has  been  committed  by  the  deposit  banks  against  the 
Government,  and  purely  with  the  view  of  gratifying  Biddle  and  the 
Barings,  and,  by  the  suspension  of  specie  payments,  degrade,  embar- 
rass, and  ruin,  if  they  could,  their  own  country,  for  the  selfish 
views  of  making  large  profits  by  throwing  out  millions  of  depreci- 
ated paper  upon  the  people,  selling  their  specie  at  large  premiums, 
and  buying  up  their  own  paper  at  discounts  of  from  25  to  30  per 
cent.,  and  now  looking  forward  to  be  indulged  in  these  speculations 
for  years  to  come,  before  they  resume  specie  payments.” 

But,  sir,  although  I have  been  surprised  to  see  the  fore- 
going charge,  I must  confess  that  I have  been  more  sur- 
prised to  see  it  published  to  the  world  week  after  week,  and 
meet  with  no  response  or  denial  from  any  man  on  this  floor 
or  elsewhere.  Are  gentlemen  conservatives  aware  of  the 
effect  of  such  a publication  upon  the  popular  mind  ? Let  me 
tell  them  it  bears  upon  its  tainted  breath,  if  false,  a charge 
too  foul  for  honest  and  honorable  men  to  submit  to  it  in 
silence.  It  distils  into  the  ignorant  and  credulous  mind  a 


ON  THE  SURPLUS  REVENUE. 


133 


poison  more  dangerous  to  the  peace  of  society  than  foreign 
invasion  or  individual  treason.  And  is  there  no  honorable 
man  connected  with  these  institutions,  or  who  stands  upon 
this  floor  as  their  guardian,  that  will  deny  the  foul  charge 
of  treachery  and  perfidy  thus  made  against  them?  Why 
this  unaccountable  silence  under  a charge  so  infamous  and 
revolting?  Is  it  the  deep  contrition  of  guilt  and  merited 
condemnation  that  has  sealed  your  mouths  ? or  are  you  trans- 
fixed with  superstitious  horror,  and  struck  with  silent  awe  at 
the  Greatest  and  Best,  who  uttered  the  anathema?  Then 
prostrate  yourselves  in  the  dust,  and  let  this  mighty  Jugger- 
naut roll  over  you  without  a groan  or  a tear.  But  if  there 
be  one  independent  and  honorable  man — as  I trust  in  God 
there  are  many — let  him  stand  forth  and  deny  this  base 
charge.  Let  this  little  band  of  conservatives  upon  this  floor, 
if  they  are  fighting  for  principles,  and  not  for  spoils,  raise 
the  banner  of  independence,  and  meet  their  destiny  like 
men ; otherwise,  they  must  soon  sink  into  utter  oblivion  and 
merited  contempt.  Already  a black  cloud  hangs  impending 
over  your  heads,  and  its  sulphurous  fires,  lighted  up  by  the 
midnight  torch  of  locofocoism,  will  soon  burst  upon  you, 
more  terrible  than  that  storm  of  fire  and  brimstone  that  over- 
whelmed the  devoted  cities  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah ; and, 
without  independence  and  firmness,  you  will  go  down  to 
your  political  graves 

“Unwept,  unhonored,  and  unsung.” 

ON  THE  TREASURY  NOTE  BILL. 

October  4,  1837,  the  House  having  under  consideration 
a bill  authorizing  an  issue  of  Treasury  notes,  an  amendment 
was  proposed  declaring,  in  substance,  that  the  banks  of 
merchants  indebted  to  the  Government  might  settle  their 
respective  balances  in  Treasury  notes  before  they  fell  due. 
Mr.  Fillmore  supported  the  amendment,  contending  that  it 
was  the  right  of  the  creditor  to  set  off  Treasury  notes,  if 
he  could  get  them,  against  his  debt  to  the  Government.  This 


134 


ON  THE  TREASURY  NOTE  BILL. 


would  hold  out  a strong  inducement  to  all  creditors  of  Gov- 
ernment to  take  these  notes,  and  they  would  thus  be  sooner 
brought  into  circulation.  Mr.  Fillmore  later  sought,  unsuc- 
cessfully, to  amend  the  bill  by  striking  out  the  clause  which 
provides  a penalty  for  a man  having  in  his  possession  paper 
similar  to  that  used  for  the  Treasury  notes,  with  intent  to 
counterfeit. 

October  17th  his  vote  is  recorded  against  the  bill  “to 
authorize  the  issuing  of  Treasury  notes,”  etc. 


UPPER  CANADA  REBELLION 


The  disturbances  caused  by  William  Lyon  Mackenzie  and 
his  followers  on  the  Niagara  frontier  in  1837-8  naturally 
compelled  the  attention  of  Congress,  and  Mr.  Fillmore,  as  a 
member  from  the  disturbed  district,  was  foremost  in  urging 
protective  measures.  On  January  12,  1838,  he  offered  the 
following  amendment  to  a pending  resolution : 

And  that  the  President  be  requested  to  communicate  to  this 
House  any  additional  information  in  his  possession,  of  acts  endan- 
gering the  amicable  relations  between  this  government  and  that  of 
Great  Britain  either  by  the  subjects  of  Great  Britain,  or  by  our  own 
citizens,  on  the  Canadian  frontier,  and  what  measures  have  been 
adopted  by  the  Executive  to  preserve  our  neutrality  with  said 
kingdom. 

Mr.  Fillmore  in  support  of  this  amendment,  remarked 
that  the  House  were  probably  aware  that  there  had  been,  and 
now  was,  a great  excitement  existing  on  the  Niagara  fron- 
tier, and  that  there  had  been  movements  in  Buffalo  in  ref- 
erence to  the  revolution  now  raging  in  Canada.  They  were 
also  probably  aware  that  an  armament  had  been  fitted  out, 
mostly  by  American  citizens,  which  had  made  a stand  on 
Navy  Island,  which  is  within  British  territory,  in  Niagara 
river,  20  miles  from  Buffalo,  and  two  or  three  miles  above 
the  Falls;  the  lowest  point  at  which  a crossing  can  be 
effected,  safely,  from  the  main  shore.  The  line  between  the 
two  countries  passes  between  Navy  Island,  which  is  well 
fortified,  and  Grand  Island,  which  is  in  the  territory  of  the 
United  States. 

Mr.  Fillmore  understood  from  letters  and  papers  of  very 
late  dates,  then  before  him,  that  there  were  upon  Navy 


135 


136 


UPPER  CANADA  REBELLION. 


Island,  some  1,500  men,  who  are  undergoing  a course  of 
military  discipline.  He  had  letters  to  the  30th  ult.  advising 
him  that  a small  steamboat  called  the  Caroline  had  been 
taken  down  the  river  from  Buffalo,  to  run  as  a ferryboat  from 
the  American  shore  to  Navy  Island.  It  seemed  that  on  the 
29th  an  armed  force  came  from  the  British  side,  in  Canada, 
and  attacked  this  steamboat,  which  had  been  running 
through  the  day,  and  which  was  then  lying  within  the  United 
States  lines,  killed  some  and  wounded  others,  then  setting 
the  boat  on  fire,  and  sending  it  over  the  falls,  and,  as  some 
accounts  alleged,  with  the  wounded  still  remaining  on  board. 
And  here  Mr.  Fillmore  read  extracts  from  the  letters,  which 
he  averred  were  from  the  very  highest  and  most  responsible 
sources,  confirming  his  statements  as  to  these  incidents. 
Having  done  which,  he  observed  that  his  object  now  was  to 
ascertain  if  the  Executive  had  any  information  on  the 
subject.1 

Mr.  Fillmore  on  March  9th  presented  a memorial, 
adopted  at  a meeting  in  Buffalo,  on  the  12th  of  February,  in 
relation  to  the  burning  of  the  Caroline,  and  the  murder  of 
citizens  on  board.  He  said : 

What  the  British  Government  will  say  to  this,  remains 
yet  to  be  heard.  Charity  and  the  friendly  relations  existing 
between  this  Government  and  that,  induce  me  to  hope  that 
the  act  will  be  disavowed  by  that  Government,  and  that  satis- 
faction, so  far  as  it  can  be  made,  will  be  immediately 
proffered. 

It  is  proper  that  I should  state  that  the  deep  and  univer- 
sal feeling  of  indignation  which  this  outrage  has  called  forth 
in  that  community  is  entirely  distinct  from,  and  independent 

1.  February  13,  1841,  Mr.  Pickens,  from  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Affairs,  made  an  elaborate  report  on  the  burning  of  the  Caroline  and  the  case 
of  McLeod.  It  is  to  be  found  in  the  Congressional  Globe,  February  19,  1841; 
also  reprinted.  In  this  report,  as  in  Mr.  Fillmore’s  speech,  and  most  other  con- 
temporary utterances  on  the  subject,  there  is  more  or  less  of  misstatement.  It 
has  never  been  shown  that  any  one  except  Amos  Durfee  was  killed  in  the 
seizure  of  the  Caroline.  The  number  of  Mackenzie’s  followers  that  gathered 
in  Navy  Island  is  also  usually  much  overstated. 


ON  THE  DEATH  OF  WILLIAM  PATTERSON. 


137 


of,  that  excitement  which  has  been  so  universally  con- 
demned, as  an  improper  interference  in  the  Canadian  re- 
bellion. 

The  memorialists  pray  that  our  Navy  and  Army  may  be 
placed  on  a proper  footing,  and  that  our  fortifications  may 
be  placed  in  a proper  state  of  defence,  and  particularly  that 
the  city  of  Buffalo  and  the  Niagara  frontier,  now  in  a per- 
fectly defenceless  state,  may  be  immediately  fortified,  and 
that  the  Government  demand  and  obtain  redress  for  this 
outrage. 

Mr.  Fillmore  moved  that  so  much  of  the  memorial  as 
relates  to  the  defence  of  the  country,  be  referred  to  the 
Committee  on  Military  Affairs;  and  so  much  as  relates  to 
the  violation  of  our  national  honor,  and  redress  therefor,  to 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs.  It  was  finally  referred 
to  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs,  without  a division. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  Fillmore  June  nth: 

Resolved,  That  the  Committee  on  Military  Affairs  be  instructed 
to  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  authorizing  the  immediate  surveys 
and  estimates  for  suitable  fortifications  for  the  protection  and 
defence  of  the  Northern  frontier. 


ON  THE  DEATH  OF  HON.  WILLIAM  PATTERSON. 

In  the  House,  December  5,  1838,  Mr.  Fillmore  delivered 
the  following  eulogy  in  memory  of  a colleague: 

Mr.  Speaker,  the  painful  and  melancholy  duty  has  de- 
volved upon  me  of  announcing  to  this  House  the  death  of 
my  lamented  friend  and  colleague,  William  Patterson.  He 
died  at  his  residence,  in  Warsaw,  New  York,  on  the  14th 
day  of  August  last. 

The  last  time  I saw  him  was  in  this  Hall,  at  the  close  of 
the  late  session.  H^  was  then  in  the  prime  of  life,  and  ap- 
parently in  the  full  enjoyment  of  health.  Blessed  by  his 
Creator  with  a constitution  that  never  felt  disease,  environed 


138  ON  THE  DEATH  OF  WILLIAM  PATTERSON. 


by  a temperance  and  regularity  of  habit  that  ordinarily  bid 
defiance  to  its  approach,  no  man  left  this  House  with  fairer 
prospects  of  returning  to  it  again.  But  the  untiring  assidu- 
ity with  which  he  devoted  himself  to  the  discharge  of  his 
duties  here  during  that  long  and  arduous  session,  doubtless 
sowed  the  seeds  of  that  disease  which  so  soon  terminated 
his  earthly  existence.  Beneath  the  external  glow  of  health 
that  then  mantled  his  cheek  was  insidiously  preying  the 
canker  worm  of  death.  He  was  barely  enabled  to  return  to 
the  bosom  of  his  family  when  his  strength  gave  way,  his 
reason  wandered,  and,  in  a few  short  days,  all  that  was 
mortal  of  William  Patterson  “slept  beneath  the  clods  of  the 
valley.’,  Would  that  this  melancholy  tale  ended  here.  But 
it  does  not.  The  partner  of  his  earthly  joys  and  sorrows, 
worn  down  with  the  watchings  and  anxieties  of  his  last 
illness,  with  a constitution  too  feeble  to  support  the  accu- 
mulated distress  of  a sensitive  mind,  sunk  beneath  the  weight 
of  her  sorrows,  and,  in  a few  days  after  his  interment,  she, 
too,  “slept  the  sleep  of  death”  by  his  side.  What  an  appalling 
bereavement  to  his  infant  children ! They  are  now  orphans 
in  this  wide  world,  exhibiting  in  their  changed  condition  an 
awful  reality  of  the  uncertainty  of  life  and  of  all  earthly 
enjoyments. 

But,  sir,  though  gone,  he  has  left  behind  him  a name  and 
reputation  dear  to  them  that  knew  him.  Modest  and  unas- 
suming in  his  character,  kind  and  generous  in  his  disposition, 
honest  and  inflexible  in  his  purpose,  to  know  him  was  to 
respect  and  esteem  him.  His  heart  was  without  guile ; and, 
though  he  made  no  professions,  yet  he  habitually  practiced 
all  the  virtues  that  adorn  the  life  of  a most  exemplary 
Christian. 

He  made  no  pretensions  to  literary  acquirements  or  states- 
manlike qualifications,  and  his  native  modesty  naturally  in- 
duced him  to  seek  the  quiet  retirement  of  private  life.  But, 
blessed  with  good  sense  and  a strong  and  retentive  memory, 
he  found  leisure,  amid  the  daily  toils  of  a laborious  occupa- 
tion, to  cultivate  a taste  for  reading,  which  stored  his  mind 
with  useful  facts.  At  the  unsolicited  request  of  his  fellow- 


LAKE  NAVIGATION  INTERESTS. 


139 


citizens,  he  reluctantly  yielded  his  assent  to  occupy  a seat 
on  this  floor.  How  he  discharged  that  important  trust,  dur- 
ing the  short  time  he  participated  in  our  deliberations,  is 
known  to  you  all.  During  a protracted  and  uncommonly 
arduous  session,  when  many  fainted  by  the  wayside,  he  was 
always  at  his  post.  During  a time  of  uncommon  excitement 
and  political  acrimony,  he  was  firm  in  the  support  of  what 
he  deemed  to  be  right,  yet  tolerant  to  the  opinions  of  others 
with  whom  he  differed.  In  one  word,  he  was  constant  and 
patient  in  the  discharge  of  all  his  official  duties,  and  untiring 
in  the  more  humble  but  useful  labors  of  his  station.  Natur- 
ally frank,  honest,  and  confiding,  he  drew  around  him  a 
circle  of  friends,  and  by  the  unadulterated  goodness  of  his 
heart,  disarmed  even  political  opposition  of  its  rancor. 
Finally,  in  all  the  relations  of  life,  as  a father,  husband, 
brother,  friend,  citizen  and  legislator,  he  was  blameless. 
That  no  testimony  of  respect  for  his  many  virtues  may  be 
wanting,  I offer  for  the  adoption  of  the  House  the  resolu- 
tions which  I send  to  the  Chair : 

Resolved,  unanimously,  That  this  House  has  received  with  deep 
sensibility  the  annunciation  of  the  death  of  Hon.  William  Patterson, 
a Representative  from  the  State  of  New  York. 

Resolved,  unanimously,  That  the  members  of  this  House  will 
testify  their  respect  for  the  memory  of  the  deceased  by  wearing 
crape  on  the  left  arm  for  thirty  days. 

LAKE  NAVIGATION  INTERESTS. 

December  io,  1838,  on  motion  of  Mr.  Fillmore,  it  whs 

Ordered,  That  the  drawings  illustrative  of  the  condition  of  cer- 
tain improvements  in  navigation  on  Lake  Erie,  which  accompany 
the  annual  report  from  the  Topographical  Bureau,  and  forming  a 
part  of  the  documents  with  the  President’s  message,  be  printed. 

January  14,  1839,  on  motion  of  Mr.  Fillmore,  it  was 

Resolved,  That  the  Committee  on  Commerce  be  instructed  to 
inquire  into  the  expediency  of  authorizing  accurate  surveys  and 
charts  to  be  made  of  such  parts  of  Lakes  Ontario,  Huron,  Erie, 


140 


THE  CAROLINE  CORRESPONDENCE. 


Michigan  and  Superior,  and  the  rivers  and  straits  connecting  the 
same,  and  the  bays  and  harbors  thereof,  as  lie  within  the  boundaries 
of  the  United  States. 

THE  CAROLINE  OUTRAGE. 

January  28,  1839,  on  motion  of  Mr.  Fillmore,  it  was 

Resolved,  That  the  President  be  requested  to  communicate  to 
this  House,  if  not,  in  his  opinion,  incompatible  with  the  public  inter- 
est, what  demand  has  been  made  upon  the  British  Government,  for 
satisfaction  for  the  outrage  committed  under  its  authority,  in  burn- 
ing the  steamboat  Caroline,  and  murdering  our  unarmed  citizens 
on  board ; and  what  reply  said  Government  has  made  to  such 
demand;  and  all  the  correspondence  on  the  subject  of  said  outrage, 
between  this  Government  and  that,  or  the  officers  or  agents  of 
either,  or  the  officers  or  agents  of  this  Government  and  the  Presi- 
dent, or  any  of  its  Departments,  which  have  not  heretofore  been 
communicated  to  this  House. 


NORTHERN  FRONTIER  PROTECTION 


On  March  i,  1839,  the  House  having  before  it  the  bill 
giving  the  President  additional  power  for  the  defence  of  the 
United  States,  etc.,  involving  the  Maine  boundary  question, 
Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  at  length. 

It  was  with  extreme  reluctance,  he  said,  that  in  his  feeble 
state  of  health,  he  added  a word  to  protract  this  debate ; nor 
should  he  have  done  so,  but  that  he  felt  that  his  own  con- 
stituents might  have  as  deep  an  interest  in  the  results  of  this 
bill  as  the  inhabitants  of  any  portion  of  the  United  States. 
This  bill,  if  he  could  credit  what  had  been  said  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Maine  [Mr.  Evans],  or  read  by  the  gentleman 
from  Maryland  [Mr.  Howard],  was  neither  more  nor  less 
than  a contingent  declaration  of  war  with  Great  Britain.  In 
such  an  event,  his  constituents  had  a deep  and  obvious  in- 
terest. It  was  true  that,  on  the  face  of  the  bill,  and  in  the 
wording  of  the  first,  second,  and  the  third  sections,  it  seemed 
to  be  contemplated  that  our  collision  with  that  power  would 
be  confined  chiefly  to  the  frontier  of  Maine ; but  such  would 
not  turn  out  to  be  the  fact.  If  resort  was  once  had  to  arms, 
the  matter  would  not  end  in  a brief  skirmish  in  Maine.  That 
little  tract  of  territory,  cold  and  barren  as  the  Siberian 
desert,  was  of  but  small  value  but  for  the  timber  it  con- 
tained. That  would  not  be  the  battlefield  on  which  this  con- 
test must  be  settled ; the  scene  of  conflict  would  extend  along 
the  entire  Northern  frontier  of  the  Union,  and  its  chief  seat 
would  be  upon  the  great  northern  lakes. 

If  it  were  true,  as  the  gentleman  affirmed,  that  even  the 
President  himself  did  not  fully  appreciate  the  urgency  of 
the  crisis,  what  must  be  the  consequences,  upon  that  crisis, 
of  passing  a bill  like  this?  What  did  the  bill  contemplate? 


141 


142 


NORTHERN  FRONTIER  PROTECTION. 


What  was  the  very  first  step  it  proposed?  It  went  at  once 
to  commit  us  to  war  de  facto.  The  first  section  went  on  the 
supposition  that  Great  Britain  would  enforce  the  claim  she 
had  set  up  by  a resort  to  arms.  Was  there  any  reason  to 
suppose  that  this  would  be  done?  The  gentleman  from 
Maine  had  told  the  House  that  it  would  be  attempted  at 
once,  and  that  a collision  had  already  taken  place. 

[Mr.  Evans  explained,  stating  his  view  that  the  bill  if 
passed,  would  prevent,  instead  of  produce,  hostilities.] 

The  gentleman  then  concedes  that  it  is  probable  a collision 
may  have  already  taken  place.  We  are,  then,  acting  on  a 
contingency,  with  little  time  to  deliberate,  and  none  to  retract 
any  step  we  may  take.  Suppose  there  shall  be  a collision 
before  the  result  of  our  deliberations  is  known.  Congress 
would  be  defunct,  and  what  will  be  the  duty  of  our  Presi- 
dent? To  wait  till  he  can  lay  propositions  before  the  Gov- 
ernment of  Great  Britain?  To  pause  and  negotiate,  and 
then  go  to  war?  No.  The  nation  is  irretrievably  committed, 
and  it  will  be  his  duty  at  once  to  expel  the  invading  force. 
No  alternative  is  left  him.  There  is  no  chance  or  space  for 
repentance  or  advice.  We  have  assumed  that  the  act1  of  Sir 

i.  Sir  John  Harvey,  Lieutenant-Governor  of  New  Brunswick,  claimed 
British  jurisdiction  for  territory  on  the  Aroostook  which  was  claimed  by 
Maine.  Mr.  Fox,  the  British  Minister,  backed  him  up  in  the  claim,  main- 
tained that  the  disputed  territory  had  been  placed  under  exclusive  British 
authority,  and  demanded  the  withdrawal  of  American  troops  therefrom.  Presi- 
dent Van  Buren,  Feb.  26,  1839,  made  the  matter  the  occasion  of  a Message  to 
Congress,  in  which,  and  in  accompanying  documents,  it  was  set  forth  that  a 
“numerous  band  of  lawless  and  desperate  men,  chiefly  from  the  adjoining 
British  Provinces,”  had  invaded  the  disputed  territory  and  were  cutting  the 
timber.  The  Governor  of  Maine  sent  the  land  agent  of  the  State,  with  a body 
of  men,  against  the  trespassers.  These  latter  captured  the  agent,  and  two 
other  citizens  of  Maine,  and  carried  them  prisoners  to  Frederickton;  where- 
upon the  Governor  dispatched  another  and  stronger  armed  posse,  to  disperse 
or  arrest  the  offenders.  Certain  British  subjects  were  seized.  The  resultant 
correspondence,  with  its  demands  and  counter-demands,  became  very  belligerent. 
Military  movements  began  on  both  sides.  Governor  John  Fairchild  of  Maine 
soon  had  a force  of  100  men  on  the  frontier  and  issued  a draft  for  1,000.  At 
this  point,  before  there  was  actual  warfare,  a friendly  agreement  was  arrived 
at  by  Secretary  of  State  John  Forsyth  and  Mr.  Fox,  the  British  Minister,  by 
which  the  border  troubles  were  allayed,  and  the  disputed  claim  was  left  for 
settlement  to  calm  deliberations  in  the  future.  In  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives, as  was  to  be  expected,  the  incident  developed  much  oratory  of  a type 
not  unfamiliar,  even  in  1839.  Mr.  Fillmore’s  share  in  the  discussion  was 
chiefly,  as  appears  from  his  remarks  herewith,  to  seize  the  occasion  that  he 
might  emphasize  the  need  of  more  protection  on  the  Northern  frontier,  and 
especially  on  the  Lakes. 


NORTHERN  FRONTIER  PROTECTION. 


143 


John  Harvey  is  the  act  of  his  Government,  and  the  President 
is  at  once  to  proceed  to  hostilities.  I am  not  prepared  to  say 
that  even  this  may  not  be  necessary.  From  the  little  exami- 
nation I have  given  the  subject,  I have  no  doubt  whatever 
that  Maine  is  in  the  right.  The  only  question  is  as  to  the 
manner  and  the  time  in  which  her  right  is  to  be  enforced. 

In  this  question  the  whole  country  is  interested  and  espe- 
cially the  people  in  my  own  district.  It  appears  to  me  that 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs  have  directed  their  atten- 
tion exclusively  to  the  interests  and  rights  of  Maine,  and 
have,  to  a great  extent,  overlooked  the  great  interests  of 
other  portions  of  the  Union  in  this  matter.  Ought  they  to 
have  forgotten  the  defenceless  position  in  which  the  whole 
Northern  frontier  would  be  placed  in  case  of  war? 

I am  surprised  to  find  not  only  solitary  provision  in  this 
bill  for  the  defence  of  a lake  frontier  of  fifteen  hundred 
miles:  with  not  a single  fort  upon  the  whole  line,  nor  a 
single  armed  vessel  owned  by  the  Government.  Is  it  right 
thus  to  make  a contingent  declaration  of  war,  and  make  no 
provisions  whatever  for  the  defence  of  that  frontier,  at  the 
same  time  that  ample  provision  is  made  for  the  sea  coast? 
It  may  be  said  that  we  entered  into  a treaty  with  Great 
Britain  in  1817  or  1818  limiting  the  number  of  armed  ves- 
sels that  should  be  maintained  by  either  Power  on  those 
lakes.  I admit  it,  but  Great  Britain  has  not  invariably  felt 
herself  bound  by  that  conviction  for  she  has  at  least,  I am 
informed,  an  armed  steam  vessel  in  her  employ  on  Lake 
Ontario,  two  or  three  on  the  upper  lakes,  and  one  on  Lake 
Champlain,  by  which,  during  the  season  of  navigation, 
every  lake  town  from  Buffalo  to  Detroit  may  be  utterly  de- 
stroyed in  less  than  one  week,  while  we  have  nothing  pre- 
pared to  resist.  I have  been  struck  very  forcibly  with  the 
singular,  and  to  me  unaccountable,  omission  in  this  bill  to 
make  any  provision  for  a case  of  such  imperious  necessity. 
I believe  we  have  not  one  piece  of  ordnance  on  the  whole 
frontier  that  could  be  pointed  against  an  invading  foe.  I 
beg  pardon  of  the  House  for  asserting  that  we  are  wholly 
defenceless. 


144 


NORTHERN  FRONTIER  PROTECTION. 


I have  just  been  told  by  the  honorable  gentleman  from 
Michigan,  who  sits  near  me,  that  the  Government,  in  its 
magnanimity,  has  given  to  the  State  of  Michigan  one  nine- 
pounder.  All  I ask  of  the  House  is  that  if  they  deem  it 
necessary  to  the  national  honor  to  make  a contingent  decla- 
ration of  war,  they  will  insert  in  this  bill  some  provision  for 
the  defence  of  the  Northern  frontier  that  shall  at  least  put 
us  on  a level  with  the  Atlantic  cities.  We  ask  no  more.  I 
know  there  is  not  time  to  erect  forts ; but  I ask  while  the 
President  of  the  United  States  is  authorized  in  this  bill  to 
equip  and  employ  the  whole  naval  force  of  the  United  States 
for  the  seacoast,  will  not  Congress  authorize  him,  at  the 
same  time,  to  purchase,  arm  and  equip  the  necessary  number 
of  steamboats  for  the  defence  of  our  Northern  frontier? 
Surely  it  is  the  duty  of  the  House  to  do  so.  Will  they  apply 
a torch  which  must  set  our  whole  Northern  frontier  in  a 
flame,  and  make  no  provision  for  our  defence? 

It  is  true  we  have  a bill  authorizing  the  erection  of  forts 
along  the  boundary  line  of  Maine,  and  another  for  repairing 
a few  of  the  dilapidated  works  on  Lake  Ontario ; but  from 
the  report  of  the  War  Department,  after  sleeping  a Rip  Van 
Winkle  sleep  of  thirty  of  forty  years,  it  seems  they  have  at 
length  waked  up  to  some  apprehension  of  our  exposed  con- 
dition ,and  they  now  propose  to  commence  at  Fort  Niagara 
a fortification  now  comparatively  useless,  and  to  proceed 
thence  eastwardly,  as  if  there  were  nothing  west  of  that 
point  worth  defending.  I shall  be  pardoned  for  saying  that 
there  are  more  people  west  of  a meridian  line  drawn  through 
Ontario,  inhabiting  states  which  border  upon  the  lakes,  than 
existed  within  the  whole  limits  of  the  United  States  at  the 
time  of  the  Revolution ; but  it  seems  that  war  is  to  be  de- 
clared, and  all  this  portion  of  the  Union  is  to  be  abandoned 
to  its  fate.  Why  this  odious  distinction? 

[In  reply  to  an  interruption  by  Mr.  Howard,  chairman  of 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  Mr.  Fillmore  read  the 
3d  section,  as  follows : 


NORTHERN  FRONTIER  PROTECTION. 


145 


“Sec.  3.  And  be  it  further  enacted,  that  in  the  event  of  either 
of  the  contingencies  provided  in  the  first  section  of  this  act,  the 
President  of  the  United  States  shall  be  authorized  to  complete  the 
public  armed  vessels  now  authorized  by  law,  and  to  equip,  man,  and 
employ,  in  actual  service,  all  the  naval  force  of  the  United  States.” 

Mr.  Fillmore  continued:] 

The  honorable  chairman  of  the  committee  says  that  the 
committee  understood  that  the  Northern  frontier  might  be 
defended  in  one  or  two  ways:  the  President  might  fit  out 
the  vessels  of  the  navy  and  employ  them  in  the  defence  of 
the  lakes.  Now,  there  is  one  objection  to  this : those  vessels 
may  find  it  very  difficult  to  ascend  the  Niagara  Falls.  It  is 
said  that  a certain  Secretary  of  War  once  directed  vessels 
to  be  built  on  Lake  Ontario  which  were  to  be  used  on  Lake 
Erie,  entirely  forgetting  that  the  Falls  interposed.  It  cer- 
tainly will  not  answer  to  fit  out  vessels  on  the  Atlantic 
which  are  to  be  used  on  the  lakes.  The  bill  only  allows  the 
President  to  complete  vessels  already  commenced.  It  is 
true  that  we  had  some  vessels  of  war  on  Lake  Erie ; part  of 
them  built  by  ourselves,  and  another  portion  consisting  of 
those  taken  from  the  British  by  Perry;  but,  after  the  last 
war,  these  vessels  were  sold  to  private  citizens,  and  they  are 
now  navigating  the  lakes  as  merchantmen.  The  Govern- 
ment has  not  a single  vessel  upon  that  lake  moved  either 
by  sail  or  steam. 

I will  not  enter  further  into  this  argument.  I trust  it  is 
quite  sufficient  to  apprise  the  House  of  the  actual  state  of 
the  case  to  induce  them  to  make  some  provision  for  the  de- 
fence of  the  Northern  frontier.  It  surely  is  not  necessary 
for  me  to  refer  to  the  exasperated  state  of  feeling  which  has 
for  some  time  prevailed  on  both  sides  of  the  line,  or  to 
remind  the  House  that,  with  all  the  exertions  of  both  Gov- 
ernments, it  has  been  scarcely  possible  to  preserve  national 
peace.  If  war  shall  come  upon  us  without  previous  prepara- 
tion, we  have  nothing  else  to  expect  but  to  see  our  cities  and 
our  villages  laid  in  ashes,  and  our  citizens  murdered.  Let 
me  not,  however,  be  misunderstood.  We  are  fully  ready  to 


146 


ON  METHODS  OF  VOTING. 


stand  by  Maine  in  the  maintainment  of  her  just  rights.  We 
are  willing  to  bare  our  bosoms  to  the  shafts  of  war  whenever 
the  honor  of  the  nation  shall  require  it.  All  we  ask  is,  that 
you  shall  make  what  provision  is  in  your  power  for  our 
defence.  Put  us  upon  the  same  footing  as  the  Atlantic 
coast.  The  British  Government  has  in  the  Canadas  eighteen 
thousand  troops,  among  the  best  that  the  world  affords,  and 
there  is  no  preparation  on  our  part  for  defence.  True,  we 
have  the  militia,  prompt  and  brave,  and  ever  ready  to  meet 
and  repel  an  invading  foe ; but  how  are  we  to  transport  them 
to  the  spot  where  their  services  may  be  required?  You  have 
scarcely  a vessel  in  Government  employ,  and  you  urge  as  an 
argument  our  treaty  with  England ; but  I pray  you  gentle- 
men to  remember  that,  as  soon  as  the  two  nations  get  to 
blows,  all  treaties  are  at  end. 

Mr.  Fillmore  asked  in  conclusion,  that  his  amendment 
might  be  read,  and  it  was  read  accordingly  in  the  words 
following : 

Add  to  the  second  section  as  follows : 

“And  to  build,  purchase,  or  charter,  arm,  equip  and  man,  such 
vessels  and  steamboats  on  the  Northern  lakes  and  rivers  whose 
waters  communicate  with  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  as 
he  shall  deem  necessary  to  protect  the  United  States  from  invasion 
from  that  quarter.” 

[Agreed  to.] 

VIVA  VOCE  VOTING  FOR  HOUSE  OFFICERS. 

On  December  21,  1839,  the  House  engaged  in  discussion 
on  a motion  doing  away  with  viva  voce  voting  for  officers. 
Mr.  Fillmore,  who  had  formerly  debated  this  subject,  again 
spoke  in  substance  as  follows: 

He  had  not  supposed  [he  said]  that  a constitutional 
lawyer  1 would  have  contended  that  the  viva  voce  mode  of 

1.  The  allusion  is  to  Caleb  Cushing  of  Massachusetts,  who  had  been  a 
representative  in  Congress  since  1835.  An  ardent  Whig  and  a skillful  debater, 
his  relations  with  Mr.  Fillmore  appear  to  have  been  intimate.  They  had  the 
common  bond  of  profound  knowledge  of  and  admiration  for  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States. 


ON  METHODS  OF  VOTING. 


147 


voting  was  the  constitutional  mode.  He  thought,  if  any 
inferences  could  be  drawn  from  the  Constitution,  they  were 
decidedly  in  favor  of  the  ballot.  It  was  well  known  that  the 
Liberal  party  in  England  had  long  contended  for  the  vote  by 
ballot;  and  why?  Because  the  influence  exercised  by  the 
aristocracy  and  the  rich  land-holders  renders  voting  there  a 
mere  form,  a mockery.  And  though  these  influences  were 
not  felt  here,  there  was  an  unseen  influence  pervading  this 
hall — the  influence  of  party  drill  and  party  organization — 
that  Moloch  upon  whose  altar  we  are  offering  our  first-born 
daily,  and  whose  grasp  was  quite  as  strong  and  as  merciless 
as  the  despotism  of  the  old  world.  If  in  England  men  were 
deterred  from  voting  in  accordance  with  their  sentiments,  by 
the  fear  of  their  landlords,  he  would  ask  if,  in  this  House, 
there  were  not  men  who  were  deterred  from  voting  as  their 
consciences  dictated,  by  the  fear  of  the  denunciations  of  the 
party  press?  The  writ  of  ejectment  would  be  issued  as 
promptly  in  one  case  of  disobedience,  as  in  the  other.  If 
the  ballot  were  necessary  in  England  and  France  to  protect 
the  voter  from  the  vengeance  of  the  aristocracy  or  the 
sovereign,  it  was  just  as  necessary  here;  we  had  only  to  put 
the  President  in  place  of  the  Crown,  and  the  necessity  was 
the  same.  He  thought  the  ballot  was  a good  system ; and  it 
was  the  old  and  long-tried  system,  having  been  the  only  one 
in  practice  until  within  the  last  year.1 


i.  At  the  opening  of  the  Third  Session,  Twenty-fifth  Congress  (December 
3,  1838),  the  Speaker  announced  the  death  of  Col.  Walter  S.  Franklin,  late 
Clerk  to  the  House;  it  was  the  necessity  of  choosing  his  successor  that  pre- 
cipitated the  debate  over  viva  voce  voting.  Mr.  Dromgoole  of  Virginia  offered 
a resolution  amending  the  House  rules  of  procedure  so  that  “in  all  cases  of 
election  by  the  House  the  vote  shall  be  taken  viva  voce.”  The  remarks  of 
Mr.  Fillmore  fairly  show  the  issue  that  was  raised.  The  new  clerk,  Hugh  A. 
Garland,  was  elected  viva  voce, — on  the  first  day  of  the  session;  but  the  prin- 
ciple was  contended  for  more  than  a month  until  finally,  January  17,  1839, 
the  House  adopted  a resolution  which  established  the  ballot  as  the  method  to 
be  employed  in  the  choice  of  House  officers,  special  committees,  etc. 


NEW  JERSEY  ELECTION  CASES 


In  March,  1840,  Mr.  Fillmore  led  the  most  strenuous 
contest  in  which  he  had  up  to  that  time  engaged.  The  sub- 
ject was  the  New  Jersey  contested  election.  He  had  pre- 
viously (February  19th)  spoken  on  the  history  of  the  case, 
and  its  consideration  in  committee.  On  March  6th,  the 
whole  day  was  spent  on  points  of  order  raised  for  the  pur- 
pose of  preventing  him  from  speaking.  The  Speaker  finally 
gave  Mr.  Fillmore  the  floor,  when  an  appeal  was  taken  from 
his  decision  and  the  discussion  continued  on  the  following 
day,  when  a vote  was  taken  and  the  decision  of  the  Chair 
sustained. 

March  5th  Mr.  Fillmore  had  offered  the  following  reso- 
lution : 

Whereas,  The  House  did,  by  a motion  adopted  on  the  28th  day 
of  February,  1840,  among  other  things  direct  the  Committee  of 
Elections  to  report  “forthwith”  which  five  of  the  ten  individuals 
claiming  seats  from  the  State  of  New  Jersey  received  the  greatest 
number  of  lawful  votes  from  the  whole  State  for  Representatives  in 
the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  at  the  election  of  1838,  in  said 
State;  and  whereas  this  House  had  previously  referred  evidence  to 
that  committee,  tending  to  show  that  the  poll  at  South  Amboy,  in 
said  State,  at  said  election,  was  not  held  according  to  law,  and  that 
the  numerous  votes  given  at  said  election  were  unlawful,  because 
the  persons  voting  had  no  legal  right  to  vote,  and  the  parties  to 
said  contest  are  now  absent  from  the  city,  with  the  consent,  and 
under  the  authority  of  said  committee,  taking  testimony  in  said  case, 
for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  who  received  the  greatest  number 
of  lawful  votes  at  said  election  in  said  State;  and  whereas  certain 
depositions  alleged  to  have  been  taken  by  one  of  the  parties  to  said 


148 


NEW  JERSEY  ELECTION  CASES. 


149 


contract,  in  pursuance  of  the  directions  of  said  committee,  have 
been  transmitted  to  the  chairman  of  said  committee  in  a sealed 
envelope,  addressed  to  the  Speaker  of  this  House,  tending  to  show, 
as  is  alleged,  that  the  polls  at  South  Amboy  were  not  held  accord- 
ing to  law,  and  that  unlawful  votes  were  taken  at  said  poll;  and 
whereas  said  committee,  in  acting  on  said  resolution  of  this  House, 
refused  to  consider  any  portion  of  said  evidence,  but  determined  to 
report,  and  have  reported,  simply  the  number  of  votes  adjudged 
to  have  been  given  to  the  several  claimants  by  the  Governor  and 
Privy  Council  of  New  Jersey,  together  with  those  returned  by  the 
election  officers  of  the  townships  of  Millville,  in  Cumberland  county, 
to  the  clerks  of  said  counties  respectively  without  inquiring  whether 
said  votes  were  lawful  or  not;  therefore, 

Resolved,  That  said  report  be  recommitted  to  said  committee, 
with  instructions  to  inquire  and  report  to  this  House,  with  all  con- 
venient despatch,  which  five  of  the  ten  claimants  to  the  vacant  seats 
in  this  House  from  said  State  received  the  greatest  number  of  law- 
ful votes  at  the  last  Congressional  election  in  said  State. 

Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  with  much  interrupting  debate  on  the 
6th,  7th,  10th  and  12th  of  March.  As  his  views  on  the 
subject  are  clearly  presented  in  his  letter  to  his  constituents, 
it  is  deemed  unnecessary  here  to  give  this  debate  in  extenso. 
The  following  passages,  however,  have  especial  interest  as 
showing  the  vigor  with  which  Mr.  Fillmore  could  maintain 
his  position  when  he  felt  that  the  principles  of  right  were 
at  stake : 

It  is  my  misfortune  to  be  connected  with  a subject  on 
which  a majority  of  this  House  seem  determined  to  hear 
nothing,  but  are,  apparently,  ready  to  decide  anything.  I 
have  scarcely  alluded  to  the  New  Jersey  election  but  that 
some  rule  of  this  House  has  been  made  to  yield  to  the  im- 
perious necessity  of  closing  my  lips.  Gentlemen  seem  de- 
termined to  stifle  all  debate,  to  suppress  all  information. 
They  may  succeed ; they  have  the  numerical  force  that  has 
been  found  sufficient  heretofore  and  may  be  again;  but  I 
will  never  tamely  and  passively  submit  to  yield  a right  which 
I hold  in  trust  for  others.  The  right  of  speech  is  guaranteed 


150 


NEW  JERSEY  ELECTION  CASES. 


by  the  Constitution.  It  is  the  sacred  and  important  right 
upon  which  all  others  depend.  Deprive  us  of  this  and  we 
are  slaves  to  the  veriest  despotism  that  ever  crushed  a pow- 
erless minority.  If  this  principle  is  to  be  established  here,  I 
should  conceive  it  no  loss  to  exchange  my  seat  for  one  in 
the  dark  cells  of  the  Spanish  inquisition.  All  that  we  shall 
have  left  will  not  be  worth  contending  for.  It  will  soon 
be  a disgrace  to  any  man  of  honorable  sentiments  to  have  it 
known  that  he  was  ever  a member  of  this  body.  Sir,  I 
would  as  willingly  be  the  slave  of  one  master  as  of  a thou- 
sand. I would  as  soon  consent  to  hold  my  right  of  debate 
here  as  a mere  tenant  at  sufferance  to  the  arbitrary  will  of 
the  gentleman  from  Pennsylvania  [Mr.  Petrikin],  as  to  hold 
it  at  the  will  of  a majority  who  follow  his  lead.  I will  never 
consent  to  hold  it  at  the  arbitrary  will  and  pleasure  of  any 
man,  or  set  of  men.  It  is  a constitutional  right  which  I 
bring  with  me  into  this  hall,  equally  inviolable  in  myself 
and  those  whom  I represent,  and  I will  never  consent — no 
never — basely  to  betray  it. 

I beg  gentlemen  of  the  majority  to  pause,  to  reflect, 
before  they  establish  this  dangerous  precedent.  Its  effect 
may  be  only  to  crush  a weak  and  humble  minority,  but  this  is 
a changeable  world  and  especially  the  political  portion  of  it. 
A few  years  may  find  those  who  now  exult  in  strength  and 
lord  it  over  this  body,  in  a defenceless  minority  like  myself. 
Let  them  beware  lest  these  bloody  treasons  which  they  now 
teach  us  return  to  afflict  themselves.  I conjure  them  to 
pause  before  they  inflict  so  deep  a wound  upon  the  Constitu- 
tion of  our  common  country. 

I beg  them  to  respect  some  rules,  observe  some  order, 
even  in  the  New  Jersey  case.  It  is  not  necessary  to  carry 
out  the  wishes  of  the  majority  to  trample  upon  the  Constitu- 
tional right  of  debate.  The  rules  of  the  House  well  admin- 
istered are  sufficient  in  all  conscience.  The  majority  pos- 
sesses all  the  power;  the  minority  have  nothing  to  protect 
them  but  the  Constitution  and  the  rules  of  the  House ; and  if 
these  are  broken  down  then  farewell  to  freedom,  farewell  to 
all  that  is  dear  to  an  American  citizen ! This  hall  becomes 


NEW  JERSEY  ELECTION  CASES. 


151 


the  temple  of  despotism,  and  you,  Mr.  Speaker,  its  high' 
priest. 

ADDRESS  TO  THE  COUNTRY  ON  THE  NEW  JERSEY  CONTESTED 
ELECTION  CASES. 

March  7th  Mr.  Fillmore  moved  to  reconsider  the  vote  by 
which  certain  testimony  had  been  taken.  After  the  usual 
obstructive  tactics  by  his  opponents,  Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  at 
length  on  questions  of  order.  He  also  undertook  to  recite 
the  facts  of  the  case,  as  they  had  developed  before  the  com- 
mittee. On  calling  for  the  reading  of  certain  evidence, 
objection  was  raised;  and  although  some  depositions  were 
read  by  the  Clerk,  March  10th,  partisan  tactics  prevented 
Mr.  Fillmore  from  getting  his  report  relating  to  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  Committee  on  Elections,  before  the  House. 
In  consequence,  Mr.  Fillmore  printed  the  minority  report 
of  that  committee,  prefacing  it  with  an  address  to  “the  whole 
country.’"  Both  the  address  and  the  report  are  signed  by 
Millard  Fillmore,  Jno.  M.  Botts,  George  W.  Crabb  and  Tru- 
man Smith.  Although  both  were  probably  in  large  part 
if  not  wholly  written  by  Mr.  Fillmore,  the  address  is  deemed 
as  sufficient  presentation  of  the  subject.1 

We  desire  to  call  the  attention  of  the  whole  country  to 
the  statement  herewith  exhibited,  as  a report  prepared  and 
presented  to  the  House  of  Representatives,  by  the  minority 

1.  These  documents  were  printed  in  pamphlet  form  with  the  following 
title:  “Address  and  suppressed  report  of  the  minority  of  the  Committee  on 

Elections  on  the  New  Jersey  case.  Presented  to  the  House  of  Representatives, 
March  io,  1840,  together  with  the  remarks  of  Mr.  Fillmore.  “For  every  one 
that  doeth  evil  hateth  the  light,  neither  cometh  to.  the  light,  lest  his  deeds 
should  be  reproved.’”  Washington:  Printed  at  the  Madisonian  office,  1840; 
8vo.,  pp.  16.  The  title  of  the  minority  report  runs:  ‘The  suppressed  report 

of  the  minority  of  the  Committee  on  Elections  on  the  New  Jersey  case;  pre- 
sented to  the  House  of  Representatives  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States, 
March  10,  1840 — and  contrary  to  all  precedent,  excluded  from  the  House  (its 
reception  and  reading  being  refused,  with  the  previous  question  pending,  and 
all  debate  shut  off),  by  a party  vote  in  the  negative.” 


152 


NEW  JERSEY  ELECTION  CASES. 


of  the  Committee  on  Elections,  to  which  was  referred  the 
contested  election  from  the  State  of  New  Jersey;  and  we 
especially  desire  to  call  their  attention  to  the  novel,  extraor- 
dinary and  appalling  circumstances,  which  have  driven  us  to 
the  necessity  of  this  appealing  to  our  fellow  citizens,  from 
one  end  of  the  Union  to  the  other ; and  we  do  it  with  the  con- 
fident assurance  that  they  will  give  to  the  subject  that  careful 
and  unprejudiced  consideration  which  its  importance  de- 
mands, and  their  own  future  safety  and  interests,  imperi- 
ously require;  that  they  will  unite  with  us  in  the  belief, 
which  in  the  honest  sincerity  of  our  hearts  we  entertain,  that 
the  Government  under  which  we  live,  must  soon  become 
worse  than  a Turkish  despotism,  unless  the  People,  in  the 
majesty  of  their  strength,  shall  arise  and  rebuke  the  perpe- 
trators of  the  outrage  which  has  been  committed  on  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  the  laws  of  one  of  the 
sovereign  States  of  this  Union,  and  the  rights  of  the  great 
body  of  the  People  themselves. 

We  will  not  enter  into  a minute  detail  of  the  means  by 
which  five  of  the  Representatives  of  the  State  of  New 
Jersey,  furnishing  the  highest  evidence  known  to  the  laws 
of  that  State,  that  they  had  been  regularly  and  constitu- 
tionally elected,  were  driven  from  their  seats,  previous  to 
any  investigation  whatever,  and  denied  all  right  to  partici- 
pate in  the  organization  and  proceedings  of  the  House,  and 
much  less  will  we  undertake  here,  to  pronounce  upon  the 
motives  which  led  to  this  unparalleled  proceeding. 

We  wish  to  take  up  this  subject  at  another  point,  and  let 
the  country  know  what  are  the  circumstances  under  which 
five  other  gentlemen  from  the  State  of  New  Jersey  have 
been  voted  into  seats  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  who 
have  presented  no  return,  no  credential,  no  commission : and 
this  too  when  the  members  holding  the  commissions  of  the 
Governor  of  that  State,  under  the  Seal  of  that  Common- 
wealth, were  at  home  by  leave  of  the  committee,  taking  de- 
positions to  prove — what  they  had  at  all  times  averred  they 
could  prove — that  they  had  received  a majority  of  the  lawful 
votes  given  at  the  polls. 


NEW  JERSEY  ELECTION  CASES. 


153 


The  proceedings  of  the  committee  having  charge  of  this 
subject,  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  the  report  below,  up  to 
the  time  that  the  report  of  the  majority  of  the  committee  was 
presented,  and  we  now  proceed  to  give  a statement  of  what 
has  since  transpired. 

But  it  must  be  remarked  in  advance  that  the  Committee, 
having  determined  that  if  an  investigation  was  to  be  prose- 
cuted behind  the  commissions  of  the  Governor,  every  prin- 
ciple of  equity  and  fairness  required  that  there  should  be  a 
thorough  search  into  the  legality  of  the  votes  given  for  each 
party,  and  finding  that  there  was  no  sufficient  testimony 
before  them  by  which  it  could  be  ascertained  for  whom  a 
majority  of  the  qualified  voters  of  New  Jersey  had  cast  their 
votes,  such  time  was  granted  as  the  parties  themselves 
deemed  requisite  to  enable  them  to  take  such  testimony  as 
they  might  think  advisable  to  establish  their  respective 
claims,  and  that  accordingly  the  parties  severally  left  Wash- 
ington for  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  where  they  now  are  en- 
gaged in  the  prosecution  of  this  work. 

During  their  absence,  and  shortly  after  their  departure 
from  the  city  (no  complaint  and  no  application  coming 
from  them  to  the  House),  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee 
submitted  a proposition  to  have  the  documents  relating  to 
the  contested  seats  printed  for  the  use  of  the  Committee. 
This  furnished  a pretext  for  the  introduction  of  another 
proposition,  that  the  Committee  should  be  instructed  to  re- 
port forthwith  which  of  the  parties  had  received  a majority 
of  all  the  votes  given  at  the  election.  After  long  debate, 
this  was  so  modified  as  to  require  them  to  report  upon  the 
lawful  votes,  which  expressly,  as  a matter  of  course,  ex- 
cluded, all  unlawful  votes. 

The  subject  went  to  the  committee  and  with  a precipita- 
tion which  we  deem  in  a high  degree  exceptional,  the  ma- 
jority of  the  committee  adopted  a resolution  directing  all  the 
votes  given  to  be  reported  as  lawful,  under  a most  extraor- 
dinary mental  delusion  that  the  instruction  required  it,  be- 
cause the  committee  were  required  to  report  forthwith.  All 
efforts  to  have  the  testimony  then  before  them  examined 


154 


NEW  JERSEY  ELECTION  CASES. 


were  successfully  resisted — reasonable  time  to  the  minority 
to  report  these  and  other  facts  to  the  House,  denied.  The 
report  was  prepared,  presented  and  received,  without  delay, 
the  title  to  which  is  well  adapted  to  create  the  impression 
that  the  votes  reported  were  all  lawful  votes,  while  the  body 
of  the  report  itself  (which  few  comparatively  of  those  who 
see  the  title  will  read)  labors  to  excuse  the  committee  for 
not  ascertaining  whether  the  votes  were  lawful  or  unlawful 
— a member  of  the  minority  of  the  committee  attempted  to 
explain  the  facts  to  the  House — the  Speaker  decided  that  he 
was  entitled  to  the  floor — the  majority  of  the  House  over- 
ruled the  decision  of  the  Chair,  and  refused  him  the  privilege 
of  speaking — the  previous  question  was  demanded,  all  de- 
bate stifled — in  the  meantime  a counter-report  is  prepared 
and  offered  to  the  House — they  refused  to  receive  it,  and 
proceeded  at  once,  wholly  ignorant  of  what  the  testimony 
established,  with  a madness  and  blindness  belonging  to  des- 
peration only,  to  vote  by  the  entire  strength  of  their  party, 
that  the  non-commissioned  members  had  received  a ma- 
jority of  lawful  votes,  and  were,  therefore,  duly  elected,  and 
entitled  to  occupy  their  seats  as  the  representatives  of  the 
State  of  New  Jersey;  and  while  the  public  funds  are  to  be 
freely  used  for  the  distribution  of  the  report  of  the  five  ad- 
ministration members  of  the  committee,  private  means  are 
to  be  resorted  to,  to  distribute  the  report  of  the  four  minority 
members. 

It  is  a circumstance,  not  the  least  remarkable  in  this 
extraordinary  case,  that  the  individual  members  of  the 
majority,  refused  to  recognize,  or  adopt  the  reasoning  of  the 
report,  but  were  entirely  satisfied  with  the  conclusions  drawn 
from  it,  while  the  author  of  the  report  was  equally  well 
satisfied  with  his  own  reasoning  but  could  not  adopt  the 
conclusions,  as  evinced  by  his  refusal  to  vote  for  the  resolu- 
tions based  upon  it,  though  present  at  the  time. 

For  every  fact  here  stated,  we  pledge  ourselves  to  produce 
the  proof  whenever  called  on,  either  before  the  House  or  the 
country;  they  are  facts  on  record,  to  be  found  on  the  jour- 
nals of  the  committee  and  of  the  House. 


NEW  JERSEY  ELECTION  CASES. 


155 


And  now,  we  ask  by  whom  these  five  gentlemen  have 
been  elected?  By  the  people  of  New  Jersey,  or  by  the 
friends  of  the  administration  in  Congress?  And  have  we 
said  too  much  in  characterizing  this  proceeding  as  novel, 
extraordinary,  and  appalling!  Have  we  done  more  or  less, 
than  our  duty  as  citizens  of  this  republic,  and  as  Representa- 
tives of  the  people,  in  thus  calling  your  attention,  emphati- 
cally, to  this  subject;  in  warning  you  of  your  danger,  and  in 
asserting  the  necessity  of  an  immediate  interposition  of  the 
majesty  of  the  people,  at  the  ballot  boxes,  to  correct  such 
monstrous  abuses  in  future. 

It  has  been  said,  and  was  generally  understood,  that  the 
party  in  power,  had,  in  secret  caucus,  resolved  on  the 
necessity  of  admitting  the  administration  claimants,  to  carry 
through  some  of  the  odious  schemes  of  the  present  admin- 
istration; still  we  hoped  that  before  they  struck  the  final 
blow,  they  might  be  induced  to  listen  to  reason  and  to  justice. 
We  appealed,  but  we  appealed  in  vain ; their  resolution  was 
as  determined  as  it  was  unjust;  they  voted,  and  succeeded, 
and  that  by  a boasted  majority  of  thirty. 

How  was  that  majority  obtained?  Only  because  some  of 
the  members  regarding  the  outrage  as  highly  gross  and 
violent,  refused  to  vote,  or  contribute  to  the  formation  of 
a quorum,  for  the  adoption  of  a report  and  a resolution  not 
founded,  as  we  all  conceive,  on  the  testimony  of  the  case, 
and  not  warranted  or  justified  by  any  consideration  what- 
ever. 

A noble  subject  for  boasting,  truly.  Let  them  make  the 
most  of  it.  It  is  a matter  of  pride  to  us,  that  we,  at  least, 
resisted  it,  and  resisted  to  the  last. 

We  feel  that  we  have  discharged  our  duty ; if  you  are  too 
indifferent  to  your  own  liberties,  to  discharge  yours,  be  it  so 
— the  consequences  must  fall  partially  on  yourselves,  but 
mainly  on  your  posterity;  but  as  citizens  of  this  Republic, 
we  tell  you  we  are  mournfully  apprehensive  for  the  future, 
and  that  you  may  not  think  we  are  too  grave  and  too  sol- 
emn, on  this  vitally  important  question,  we  beg  leave  respect- 
fully to  invite  your  attention  to  the  proceedings  in  several 


156 


FOR  DEFENSE  OF  BUFFALO. 


of  the  State  Legislatures,  particularly  those  of  New  Jersey, 
Massachusetts,  New  York,  and  Virginia,  and  to  the  Special 
Message  of  the  Executive  of  the  last-mentioned  Common- 
wealth, and  if  all  this  does  not  arouse  you  to  the  importance 
of  this  subject,  all  further  effort  on  our  part  will  be  vain. 

But  we  will  not  permit  ourselves  to  indulge  in  any  appre- 
hensions— we  are  not  old  enough — we  have  not  yet  come  to 
that  pass  when  those  who  are  clothed  with  power  for  the 

protection  of  our  liberties,  can  be  sustained  in  such  an  en- 

croachment on  the  rights  of  the  people,  either  for  the  pur- 
pose of  propitiating  Executive  favor  on  the  one  hand,  or  of 
perpetuating  political  power  on  the  other. 

We  respectfully  ask  that  our  report,  which  those  who 
should  have  acted  upon  it  have  refused  to  receive  (the  first 
instance  of  the  kind,  as  we  believe,  that  has  occurred  in  the 
government),  may  meet  with  that  calm,  temperate  and  un- 
prejudiced deliberation  to  which  it  is  entitled  from  the 
importance  of  the  question  involved. 

Millard  Fillmore.  Geo.  W.  Crabb. 

Jno.  M.  Botts.  Truman  Smith. 

Washington,  March  12,  1840. 

FOR  DEFENCE  OF  BUFFALO. 

March  23,  1840,  on  motion  of  Mr.  Fillmore,  it  was 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  Military  Affairs  be  instructed 
to  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  fortifying  the  Niagara  frontier, 
and  especially  of  providing  for  the  protection  and  defense  of  the 
harbor  and  city  of  Buffalo. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  Fillmore: 

Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  of  War  be  directed  to  report  to 
this  House  what  machines,  tools,  or  implements,  if  any,  belonging 
to  the  United  States,  or  used  in  the  construction  or  repair  of  the 
harbors  or  piers  or  other  public  work  on  the  great  northern  and 
western  lakes,  or  the  water  connected  therewith,  have  been  sold 
since  the  first  day  of  January,  1840,  and  the  cost  of  such  machines, 
implements,  or  tools,  respectively,  and  the  price  for  which  they 


THE  CAROLINE  CORRESPONDENCE. 


157 


were  respectively  sold,  and  the  authority  by  which  such  sales  were 
made. 

The  second  session  of  the  Twenty-sixth  Congress  was 
begun  on  December  7,  1840.  On  December  21st  Mr. 
Fillmore  offered  the  following: 

Resolved , That  the  President  of  the  United  States  be  requested 
to  communicate  to  this  House  (if  not  in  his  opinion  incompatible 
with  the  public  interest)  all  the  correspondence  between  this  Gov- 
ernment and  that  of  Great  Britain,  or  the  officers  and  agents  of 
either,  or  the  officers  and  agents  of  this  Government  with  the  Presi- 
dent or  any  of  its  Departments,  which  has  not  heretofore  been  com- 
municated to  this  House,  on  the  subject  of  the  outrage  of  burning 
the  Caroline  on  the  Niagara  frontier;  and  whether  there  is  any 
prospect  of  compensation  being  made  to  the  owner  of  said  boat 
for  the  loss  thereof;  and  also  whether  any  communications  have 
been  made  to  this  Government  in  regard  to  the  arrest  and  imprison- 
ment of  1 McLeod,  by  the  authorities  of  the  State  of  New 

York,  for  being  concerned  in  said  outrage;  and  if  so,  that  he  com- 
municate a copy  thereof  to  this  House. 

On  the  same  day  Mr.  Fillmore  submitted  the  following 
resolution,  which  was  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the 
Whole  on  the  State  of  the  Union,  and  ordered  to  be  printed : 

Resolved  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  in  Con- 
gress assembled  (two-thirds  of  both  Houses  deeming  it  necessary), 
That  the  following  article  be  proposed  to  the  Legislatures  of  the 
several  States,  as  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  which  article,  when  ratified  by  three-fourths  of  the  said 
Legislatures,  to  be  valid,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  as  part  of  the 
said  Constitution : 

“The  six  years’  term  of  service  prescribed  in  the  Constitution 
for  United  States  Senators,  and  the  two  years’  term  for  which 
members  of  the  House  of  Representatives  are  to  be  chosen,  shall 
commence  on  the  first  day  of  December,  instead  of  the  fourth  day 
of  March. 

“Those  Senators  and  Representatives  who  shall  be  in  office  when 
this  amendment  shall  be  adopted  as  a part  of  the  Constitution,  shall 
hold  their  offices  respectively  until  the  first  day  of  December  next 
after  the  fourth  day  of  March  when  their  offices  would  expire  had 
this  amendment  not  been  made.” 


1.  Alexander. 


BURNING  OF  THE  CAROLINE 


On  January  2,  1841,  President  Van  Buren  sent  a Message 
to  the  House,  with  correspondence  which  had  passed  between 
the  Secretary  of  State,  John  Forsyth,  and  the  British  Min- 
ister, Mr.  H.  S.  Fox,  concerning  the  imprisonment  of 
Alexander  McLeod  of  Upper  Canada  on  a charge  of  murder 
and  arson  in  connection  with  the  destruction  of  the  steam- 
boat Caroline  on  the  Niagara  in  December,  1837.  Mr. 
Fillmore  shared  in  several  debates  regarding  Great  Britain’s 
demand  for  McLeod’s  liberation,  and  other  subjects  related 
to  the  border  disturbances  of  1837-8.  On  January  4th  he 
moved  that  President  Van  Buren’s  Message,  with  accom- 
panying documents,  be  referred  to  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Relations,  and  that  five  thousand  extra  copies  be 
printed.  Before  resuming  his  seat,  Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  in 
substance  as  follows  in  relation  to  the  communication  from 
the  Minister  of  Great  Britain,  “and  in  regard  to  the  facts 
as  stated  by  that  functionary  in  connection  with  the  outrage 
upon  the  steamboat  Caroline” : 

“That  boat,  as  I am  informed  on  good  authority,  belonged 
to  a man  in  the  city  of  Buffalo,  named  William  Wells,  who 
was,  and  is  now,  considered  a very  peaceable  and  respectable 
citizen  of  that  city.  The  boat  did  not  belong  to  the  ‘Pa- 
triots,’ or  the  insurgents  of  Canada,  nor  was  it  in  any  way 
whatever  under  their  control  or  authority.”  This  being  the 
case,  he  could  not  conceive  why  the  appellation  bestowed 
upon  it  by  the  minister  of  Great  Britain  could  have  been 
given.  There  was  no  reason  for  it.  Yet,  said  Mr.  Fillmore, 


ON  THE  CAROLINE  AFFAIR. 


159 


he  has  thought  proper  to  call  the  boat  a piratical  vessel,  in 
the  employ  of  those  persons  denominated  Canadian  Patriots. 

Mr.  Fillmore  then  proceeded  to  state  what  he  maintained 
were  the  real  facts  in  relation  to  the  burning  of  the  Caroline : 
Mr.  Wells,  at  the  time  the  insurgents  were  in  the  occupation 
of  Navy  Island,  in  Niagara  River,  on  the  Canadian  side,  was 
then  in  the  city  of  Buffalo,  twenty  miles  above.  He  there 
applied  to  the  custom-house  authorities  for  permission  to 
run  a boat,  as  a ferry  boat,  from  Schlosser  across  to  Navy 
Island.  Permission  being  given,  the  Caroline  commenced 
running,  simply  as  a ferry  boat,  being  totally  unarmed,  and 
having  no  connection  with  the  insurgents.  Neither  did  the 
boat  carry  any  arms  or  munitions  of  war  of  any  kind  to 
those  on  Navy  Island,  but  was  engaged  merely  in  the  carry- 
ing of  passengers.  After  making  several  trips,  the  boat  was 
at  night  safely  moored  and  secured  within  the  wharf  on  the 
American  side — not  within  the  “nominal”  territory  of  the 
United  States,  but  within  the  undoubted  territory  of  this 
Government;  “as  much  so,”  said  Mr.  Fillmore,  “as  this 
hall,  in  which  we  are  now  assembled,  is  in  the  territory  of 
the  United  States.  After  being  thus  safely  moored  at  the 
wharf  in  our  territory,  it  was  left  in  the  charge  of  a watch, 
unarmed,  and  without  any  arms  whatever  being  on  board, 
except  a single  pocket  pistol,  not  loaded.  Well,  while  the 
boat  was  thus  lying  within  our  territory,  it  was  attacked  in 
the  night  by  an  armed  force  in  Canada,  sent,  as  it  now  ap- 
pears, by  the  authority  of  her  Majesty.  One  man  was  mur- 
dered, others  injured,  the  boat  then  set  on  fire,  turned  adrift, 
and  sent  over  the  falls.  This  was  the  ‘arson’  complained  of ; 
this  was  the  ‘murder’  complained  of.  One  of  our  citizens 
was  attacked,  unarmed,  and  had  his  brains  knocked  out; 
and  there  was  every  reason  to  believe  that  others  were  killed, 
or  so  injured  as  to  be  unable  to  leave  the  vessel  before  it 
went  over  the  falls. 

“Now,  by  the  laws  of  the  State  of  New  York  this  was 
murder,  and  nothing  less  than  murder ; and  the  perpetrators, 
on  being  apprehended,  would  be  tried  by  the  laws  of  that 
State  for  the  crime.  It  was  a matter  pertaining  to  the  State ; 


160 


ON  THE  RIGHTS  OF  MEMBERS. 


and  neither  this  Government  nor  the  Executive  of  the  Gov- 
ernment, could  have  any  control  over  it,  unless,  indeed,  the 
Government  of  Great  Britain  should  see  fit  to  repeal  its 
present  law,  and,  entering  into  treaty  stipulations,  make  laws 
which  should  be  truly  applicable  to  the  case.”  If  so,  Mr. 
Fillmore  was  understood  to  say,  the  matter  might  perhaps 
be  compromised.  But,  apart  from  that,  if  the  same  spirit 
was  manifested  by  the  powers  at  home  as  was  exhibited  by 
the  British  Minister  here  in  relation  to  this  matter,  he  (Mr. 
Fillmore)  conceived  that  the  necessary  consequences  of  the 
conviction  of  McLeod  would  be  serious  indeed.  He  had  no 
doubt  but  that  McLeod  would  be  put  upon  his  trial,  when 
he  sincerely  hoped  he  would  be  found  innocent.  But  if  he 
should  be  found  guilty,  he  had  no  doubt  but  that  he  would 
be  executed,  unless,  indeed,  a force  much  larger  than  com- 
mon should  be  brought  from  the  Canada  side  to  his  rescue. 

Mr.  Fillmore  concluded  by  showing  that  his  reason  for 
making  these  remarks  was  to  show  that  there  was  a false 
impression  entertained  by  Mr.  Fox  in  regard  to  the  facts  of 
the  case. 

ON  THE  RIGHTS  OF  MEMBERS. 

January  5,  1841,  Mr.  Fillmore  shared  in  debate  on  a 
Pennsylvania  contested  election  case,1  the  gist  of  his  argu- 
ment being  that  any  person  contesting  the  right  of  a member 
to  a seat,  had  a right  to  be  heard.  He  contended  that  the 
right  to  be  heard  did  not  result  from  the  fact  of  a man  being 
a candidate  or  not. 

1.  The  case  was  that  of  the  third  Congressional  District  of  Pennsylvania, 
Charles  Naylor  and  Charles  J.  Ingersoll  being  rival  claimants  for  the  seat — 
the  former  being  the  occupant,  the  latter  the  contestant.  Mr.  Fillmore’s  argu- 
ment was  that  Ingersoll  was  entitled  to  a hearing.  On  the  day  following — 
January  6th — he  introduced  a bill  entitled:  “An  Act  regulating  the  taking 

of  testimony  in  cases  of  contested  election,  and  for  other  purposes.’’  Mr. 
Naylor  was  finally  declared  entitled  to  the  contested  seat. 


ON  THE  CASE  OF  McLEOD 


In  February,  1841,  the  House  Committee  on  Foreign 
Affairs  made  a report  on  the  burning  of  the  Caroline  and 
the  case  of  McLeod.  In  the  lively  debate  which  ensued,  Mr. 
Fillmore  shared.  His  principal  remarks,  February  13th, 
were  in  substance  as  follows : 

I may  have  mistaken  the  purport  of  this  report;  I have 
only  heard  it  read  once  at  the  Clerk’s  table,  and  I have  had 
no  opportunity  to  examine  its  contents.  The  gentleman  from 
South  Carolina  [Mr.  Pickens]  says  it  is  conciliatory;  that 
it  will  add  nothing  to  the  exasperated  feeling  already  exist- 
ing on  the  frontier.  I believe  that  he  thinks  that  his  report 
will  have  that  effect;  but  I much  fear,  from  what  other 
gentlemen  of  the  committee  say,  that  he  is  mistaken.  I voted 
in  favor  of  laying  the  motion  to  print  on  the  table  because  I 
thought  the  effect  would  be  such  as  the  gentleman  antici- 
pated, and  I wanted  the  report  laid  on  the  table  that  I might 
have  time  to  look  into  it,  and  see  if  my  original  impressions 
should  be  confirmed.  If,  upon  examination,  I had  found 
that  it  was  not  calculated  to  produce  the  results  I appre- 
hended, no  man  would  vote  for  its  printing  more  freely  than 
I would.  The  House,  however,  has  refused  to  lay  the  motion 
to  print  on  the  table,  and  has  thought  proper  to  decide  that 
the  report  shall  be  published. 

Having,  as  I have  stated,  only  heard  the  report  once  read, 
and  judging  from  what  others  say  of  it,  I concur  in  the 
opinion  of  the  gentleman  from  Massachusetts  [Mr.  Adams] 
that  the  subject  should  be  recommitted  to  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Affairs.  I had  hoped  from  the  Committee  a calm, 
deliberate,  and  dignified  report  in  the  case  of  the  burning  of 

161 


162 


THE  CASE  OF  McLEOD. 


the  Caroline  and  the  arrest  of  McLeod ; that  it  would  have 
been  limited  to  that  matter  alone,  instead  of  embracing,  as  it 
apparently  does,  all  our  subjects  of  controversy  with  Great 
Britain;  and  that  it  would  have  set  the  country  right  with 
reference  to  the  facts  in  that  case.  I may  be  mistaken  as 
regards  some  of  those  facts,  but  upon  a careful  examination 
of  the  testimony,  subsequent  to  the  time  when  I last  sub- 
mitted a few  remarks  on  this  case,  I observe  I was  mistaken 
in  some  of  the  facts  connected  with  the  transaction.  As  I 
was  not  present  on  the  occasion,  all  the  knowledge  I have 
I derive  from  the  newspapers  and  from  public  documents, 
as  others  may,  and  probably  do.  But  upon  this  question, 
which,  as  I have  said,  is  one  of  vital  importance  to  that  part 
of  the  country  where  I reside,  we  must  recollect,  in  the  first 
place,  that  there  is  a judicial  question  depending.  And  I 
was  in  hopes  that  in  this  report,  exciting  and  inflammatory 
in  its  character  as  I now  think  it  is,  nothing  would  have  been 
said,  and  that  so  far  as  this  House  was  concerned,  nothing 
would  have  been  done,  calculated  to  increase  the  excitement 
which  already  exists.  I confess  that  I have  heard  with 
regret  and  shame  the  reports  from  that  part  of  the  country 
in  regard  to  the  treatment  of  this  individual,  who  is  so  soon 
to  be  put  upon  his  trial  for  murder.  I cannot  for  any  consid- 
eration countenance  for  a moment  the  idea  that  the  laws  of 
this  country  are  to  be  basely  trampled  on  by  any  authority 
whatsoever.  I cannot  countenance  the  idea  that  the  judiciary 
of  the  country  shall  for  a moment  be  overawed,  directed,  or 
controlled,  by  any  other  authority  than  that  of  the  laws 
themselves. 

And,  whilst  I say  this,  I am  also  unwilling  to  countenance 
anything  there,  or  to  do  anything  here,  which  may  tend  to 
such  results.  I hope  that  we  may  have  been  misinformed  as 
to  the  nature  of  the  proceedings  there;  I am  unwilling  to 
believe  that,  in  a community  of  citizens  such  as  that,  and 
with  many  of  whom  I am  well  acquainted,  and  who  are 
highly  respectable  and  intelligent,  such  things  have  occurred. 
I say,  I hope  we  have  been  misinformed;  I trust  we  have. 
I have  seen  different  statements  of  those  transactions,  and 


THE  CASE  OF  McLEOD. 


163 


some  of  them  thave  been  of  an  exculpatory  character.  But 
one  thing,  at  all  events,  should  be  borne  in  mind  by  all  whose 
duty  requires  them  to  act  on  this  subject  here.  There  is  a 
great  state  of  excitement  on  that  frontier,  which  might  by 
possibility  lead  to  an  outbreak.  My  objection  to  the  printing 
of  the  report  was,  that  it  was  calculated  to  inflame  the 
public  mind;  and  I was  governed  in  that  vote  by  three 
reasons. 

In  the  first  place,  I did  not  wish  that  anything  should  be 
done  here  which  might  have  a tendency  to  do  injustice  to  the 
individual  who  is  soon  to  be  tried  by  the  laws  of  the  State 
of  New  York.  I desire  that  the  law  should  have  its  free 
action ; that  no  excitement  should  be  raised  against  McLeod 
which  might  prevent  a fair  and  impartial  trial.  In  the  second 
place,  I do  not  desire  that  any  action  on  the  part  of  this 
House  should  compromise  or  control  the  Executive  of  this 
nation  in  the  negotiations  now  pending  between  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States  and  the  Government  of  Great 
Britain. 

I have  all  confidence  in  the  incoming  Administration.  If 
this  controversy  can  be  amicably  and  honorably  settled 
between  the  two  Governments,  I desire  that  it  should.  But 
there  is  a third  and  very  strong  reason  in  my  mind  against 
anything  being  done  to  exasperate  the  public  mind  on  the 
subject  of  war  with  Great  Britain.  It  is  this:  for  three  or 
four  years  I have  used  all  the  exertions  in  my  power  to 
induce  this  Administration,  which  is  responsible  to  the 
country,  to  provide  some  means  of  defence  on  our  Northern 
frontier.  But  all  my  efforts  were  in  vain.  And  yet  the  gen- 
tleman from  South  Carolina  [Mr.  Pickens]  now  tells  us  that 
the  course  to  be  pursued  to  avoid  war  with  Great  Britain  is, 
to  stand  up  to  her — to  threaten  her — to  take  a high  stand; 
and  that,  he  says,  will  avert  a war.  I may  have  been  mis- 
taken in  the  meaning.  I know  that  those  were  not  his  words. 
But  I would  submit  to  him  that  the  best  way  to  avoid  a war 
with  Great  Britain,  is  to  show  that  we  are  prepared  to  meet 
her,  if  there  is  to  be  war;  because  reasonable  preparations 
for  defence  are  better  than  gasconading. 


164 


THE  CASE  OF  McLEOD. 


Mr.  Fillmore  then  alluded  to  the  defenseless  condition  of 
the  Northern  frontier.  He  desired,  and  believed  the  whole 
country  desired,  that  we  should  yield  nothing  to  the  demands 
of  Great  Britain,  to  which  she  was  not  fairly  entitled.  But, 
at  the  same  time,  he  regarded  it  as  rather  the  act  of  a mad- 
man, to  precipitate  the  country  into  a war  before  it  was 
prepared  for  it,  than  the  act  of  a statesman.  In  his  section 
of  the  country,  the  people  would  yield  nothing  to  Great  Bri- 
tain to  which  she  was  not  justly  entitled ; or  they  would  yield 
it  only  with  the  last  drop  of  their  blood.  But  he  did  not 
wish  prematurely  to  be  drawn  into  war ; he  did  not  wish  to 
invite  Great  Britain  to  invade  our  defenseless  coast.  The 
true  plan  was  to  prepare  for  war  if  we  had  yet  to  come  to  it, 
but  to  do  nothing  in  the  way  of  bragging.  If  it  did  come, 
gentlemen  would  not  find  his  [Mr.  Fillmore’s]  people 
shrinking  from  their  just  share  of  responsibility.  All  they 
had — their  property,  their  lives,  everything — they  were 
willing  to  devote,  if  need  be,  to  the  service  and  honor  of 
their  country.  But,  was  it  not  the  part  of  wisdom  and  pru- 
dence, before  we  made  a declaration  of  war,  to  prepare  for 
it?  This  was  all  he  desired;  and  if  this  report  was  calcu- 
lated to  stir  up  a war  feeling,  without  corresponding  prepa- 
ration being  made  to  meet  the  consequences,  he,  for  one,  was 
opposed  to  it.  He  did  not  wish  the  country  to  be  disgraced 
by  defeat.  When  she  must  go  to  war,  he  desired  to  see  her 
prepared  for  it ; he  desired  to  see  her  placed  in  a situation 
which  would  enable  her  to  bid  defiance  to  the  power  of  any 
government  on  earth. 

Mr.  Fillmore  then  alluded  to  the  Fortification  bill  reported 
from  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means.  That  bill  con- 
tained appropriations  to  the  amount  of  nearly  half  a million 
dollars  (though  that,  he  believed,  was  only  about  half  of  the 
amount  usually  appropriated  for  such  purpose)  ; and  yet 
there  was  not  a solitary  fortification  on  the  Northern  fron- 
tier to  which  any  part  of  that  money  was  to  be  applied.  Was 
this  the  way  in  which  we  should  prepare  for  war  ? Did  the 
gentleman  from  South  Carolina  who  presented  the  report, 
desire  to  declare  war  against  England,  before  the  new  Ad- 


FRONTIER  PROTECTION. 


165 


ministration  came  into  power?  If  so,  he  [Mr.  Fillmore] 
would  oppose  it.  He  was  for  war,  if  necessary,  but  not  until 
we  were  prepared  for  it.  He  wished,  therefore,  that  the 
gentleman  from  South  Carolina,  would  permit  the  report  to 
be  recommitted  to  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs,  and 
that  that  committee  might  be  instructed  to  confine  themselves 
to  the  subject  originally  referred  to  them,  and  to  that  alone. 
For  his  own  part,  he  trusted  and  he  believed  that  the  right 
of  this  matter  was  with  the  American  people ; and  it  ought 
at  all  hazards  to  be  maintained.  But  he  was  unwilling  at 
the  close  of  a session,  and  when  the  present  Administration 
had  but  something  like  two  weeks  to  remain  in  power,  to 
precipitate  the  nation  into  war  without  any  preparation  on 
our  part  to  meet  it.  And  it  was  for  this  reason  mainly  that 
he  objected  to  the  report.  But  as  he  said  before,  he  might 
be  mistaken  as  to  its  contents.  He  hoped  he  was;  for  he 
was  at  all  times  prepared  to  go  with  him  who  went  furthest 
in  maintaining  the  honor  of  the  nation  and  punishing  insult 
or  aggression. 

FRONTIER  DEFENSIVE  MEASURES. 

February  16,  1841,  Mr.  Fillmore  introduced  the  follow- 
ing: 

Resolved , That  the  Committee  on  Military  Affairs  be  instructed 
to  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  reporting  a bill  making  the  neces- 
sary appropriations  for  fortifications,  naval  armaments,  and  other 
necessary  preparations  to  place  the  country  in  a proper  state  of 
defence.  (Adopted.) 

He  subsequently  (February  26th)  sought,  unsuccessfully, 
to  have  the  Naval  Appropriation  bill  so  amended  that 

“in  case  the  Government  of  Great  Britain  shall  build  any  naval  arma- 
ments for  any  of  the  lakes  or  rivers  separating  the  United  States 
from  the  Canadas,  then  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  Government  to 
build  vessels  on  our  side  of  at  least  a corresponding  size;  and  so 
much  of  the  money  hereby  appropriated  as  may  be  necessary,  shall 
be  applied  to  that  object.” 

This  resolution,  however,  was  ruled  out  of  order. 


166 


SUB-TREASURY  REPEAL  BILL. 


ON  THE  SUB-TREASURY  REPEAL  BILL. 

June  22,  1841,  on  the  Sub-Treasury  Repeal  bill,  Mr. 
Fillmore  spoke  at  length.  There  seemed  to  him  to  be  some 
doubt  whether  the  enacting  of  the  second  clause  of  the 
Senate’s  bill  would  not  revive  the  State  Bank  law  of  1836. 
This  was  a serious  question ; for  he  believed  that  the  State 
Bank  system  was  almost  as  universally  condemned  by  the 
people  as  the  Sub-Treasury. 


TWELVE  MILLION  DOLLAR  LOAN 


June  24,  1841,  Mr.  Fillmore  from  the  Committee  on 
Ways  and  Means  reported  a bill  authorizing  a loan  not  to 
exceed  $12,000,000. 

In  the  House  July  7th,  Mr.  Fillmore  announced  his  inten- 
tion of  offering  an  amendment  when  the  fourth  section 
should  be  under  consideration.  Before  reaching  that  section 
he  spoke  at  some  length,  giving  a general  analysis  of  the 
bill.  It  authorized  the  President  to  borrow  twelve  millions 
of  dollars  at  an  interest  not  to  exceed  5%  reimbursable  at 
the  end  of  eight  years,  with  an  additional  authority  to  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  when  there  should  be  a surplus 
in  the  Treasury,  to  buy  up  the  stock. 

The  first  question  would  be,  said  Mr.  Fillmore  in  sub- 
stance, is  such  a loan  necessary?  or  any  part  of  it?  For  it 
did  not  follow  because  the  President  was  empowered  to 
borrow  twelve  millions  that  he  must  therefore  borrow  the 
entire  sum.  In  order  to  ascertain  whether  the  loan  was 
necessary,  it  would  be  requisite  to  resort  to  the  report  of  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  from  which  it  appeared  there 
would  be  a deficit  on  the  1st  of  September  next  of  $5,251,- 
388.30.  This  was  the  most  immediate  and  pressing  want  of 
the  Treasury.  This  deficiency  now  existed,  and  the  money 
would  be  wanted  to  meet  the  demands  on  Government  be- 
tween now  and  the  1st  day  of  September  next.  Mr.  Fillmore 
quoted  at  length  from  the  Secretary’s  report  and  went  on, 
item  by  item,  explaining  each  briefly,  concluding  with  a com- 
parison between  a loan  and  treasury  notes  as  a measure  of 


167 


168 


TWELVE  MILLION  DOLLAR  LOAN. 


supply,  and  declaring  his  preference  for  a loan  as  more  con- 
venient, “and  also  more  open  and  manly.” 

July  1 2th  he  spoke  further  on  the  same  measure;  calling 
especial  attention  to  the  falling  off  in  revenue  under  the 
Compromise  Act. 

From  over  six  millions,  they  had  fallen  down  to  three 
million,  one  hundred  and  fifty-eight  thousand,  only  four- 
tenths  of  which  fell  in  before  the  ist  of  July.  He  stated 
the  total  reduction  on  the  customs  amount  to  seven  and  a 
half  millions.  The  previous  Administration  had  used  up  all 
the  current  revenue,  besides  seven  millions  extra,  which  had 
been  in  store  when  they  came  into  power.  They  had  thus 
used  up  fourteen  millions  extra,  and  still  left  the  Govern- 
ment in  debt.  By  what  sort  of  magic  did  they  suppose  the 
Government  was  still  to  meet  all  demands  after  such  a re- 
duction? Then,  besides,  there  were  three  million  and  a half 
taken  off  by  the  Land  Bill  for  distribution.  With  a diminu- 
tion, then,  of  from  sixteen  to  eighteen  millions,  gentlemen 
still  expected  to  make  the  country  believe  that  the  means  of 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  were  ample  and  abundant.  A 
great  confusion  of  ideas  seemed  to  prevail  as  to  the  terms 
appropriation  and  indebtedness.  There  might  be  appropria- 
tion without  indebtedness,  and  there  might  be  indebtedness 
without  appropriation.  Suppose  Congress  should  appro- 
priate a large  sum  for  works  not  to  be  begun  till  some  future 
time,  during  that  interval  there  would  be  an  appropriation, 
but  not  strictly  a debt.  On  the  other  hand,  a work  might  be 
very  necessary,  and  the  Government  under  actual  obligation 
to  perform  it,  and  yet  no  appropriation  made  for  it.  There 
would  be  a debt  but  no  appropriation.  There  was  now  a 
large  amount  of  debt  to  be  appropriated  for. 

FORTIFICATION  WITHOUT  JURISDICTION? 

On  the  Fortification  Bill,  July  14,  1841,  Mr.  Fillmore 
opposed  an  amendment  appropriating  $50,000  for  fortifica- 


A QUESTION  OF  JURISDICTION. 


169 


tion  on  Pea  Patch  Island,  Delaware  river,  or  elsewhere,  if 
Government  title  to  said  island  could  not  be  obtained. 

He  apprehended  there  was  little  danger  than  an  enemy 
would  venture  to  advance  so  far  up  the  river  as  to  strike  at 
Philadelphia,  and  there  were  other  points  besides  this  which 
might  be  availed  of  as  points  of  defence.  “To  appropriate 
unconditionally  $50,000  towards  the  works  on  the  Pea  Patch 
Island  would  only  augment  the  difficulty  of  settling  the 
title;  the  demands  of  the  claimant  would  grow  with  every 
such  addition  to  the  value  of  the  property.’, 

The  island  in  question  was  in  itself  of  no  value;  all  its 
value  was  from  the  expenditures  of  Government  upon  it; 
the  more  these  were  increased  the  harder  it  would  be  to 
deal  with  the  owner.  Mr.  Fillmore  was  opposed  to  a for- 
cible seizure  under  the  right  of  eminent  domain.  A consti- 
tutional question  might  arise,  whether  the  Constitution,  in 
allowing  private  property  to  be  taken  for  public  use,  contem- 
plated real  estate,  or  only  personal.  Besides,  when  a piece  of 
ground  was  ceded  by  a State  to  the  General  Government  for 
a fort  or  dockyard,  not  only  the  title  went  over  but  the  juris- 
diction also ; but  should  Government,  by  its  eminent  domain, 
seize  land  within  a State  for  public  use,  a question  would 
arise  whether  it  thereby  obtained  the  jurisdiction  at  all, 
though  it  might  get  a title.  Jurisdiction  would  depend  on 
the  assent  of  the  State  Legislature.  And  did  you  wish 
the  Government  to  own  a fort  where  it  had  no  jurisdic- 
tion ? . . . 


SPEECH  ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL 


DELIVERED  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES 
JULY  24,  1841. 


Mr.  Fillmore  arose  and  said  in  substance,  that  he  would 
avail  himself  of  that  occasion  to  speak  of  the  necessity  and 
object  of  the  bill.  What  he  had  to  say  on  the  merits  of  the 
bill  might  as  well  be  said  at  that  time  as  any  other.  Indeed, 
the  principal  provisions  of  the  bill  were  embraced  in  the  first 
section.  The  other  parts  of  it  were  merely  intended  to  carry 
out  in  detail  the  principles  there  asserted,  and  prevent  some 
frauds  that  were  now  practiced  upon  the  revenue;  and  he 
would  explain  those,  if  desired,  when  they  came  up  for  con- 
sideration. 

In  the  first  place,  he  continued,  I desire  to  solicit  the  un- 
divided attention  of  the  members  of  this  House  to  the  facts 
and  figures  to  which  I feel  it  my  duty  to  call  their  attention. 
I deem  the  subject  under  consideration  of  vast  importance  to 
the  country,  and  one  that  demands  the  sober  deliberation  of 
every  member  of  this  committee.  It  is  a business  matter — 
of  facts  and  details — and  were  I ever  disposed  to  make  a 
speech  for  “Buncom”  1 this  is  certainly  not  the  time  or  the 
occasion  which  I should  select  for  that  object.  The  little 
that  I have  to  say  will  be  unadorned  with  the  flowers  of 
rhetoric,  and  confined  directly  to  the  subject  under  considera- 
tion, and  addressed  to  those  who  hear  me. 

1.  An  incorrect  but  frequent  spelling.  The  use  of  the  word,  to  indicate 
empty  talk,  originated  in  the  Sixteenth  Congress,  near  the  close  of  the  debate 
on  the  Missouri  question.  Felix  Walker,  an  old  North  Carolina  mountaineer, 
whose  district  included  the  county  of  Buncombe,  rose  to  speak.  An  outcry 
against  his  continued  remarks  being  raised,  he  protested  that  in  behalf  of  his 
constituents  he  was  bound  to  talk  “for  Buncombe.” 


70 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


171 


The  first  section  of  the  bill  declares,  in  substance,  that  a 
duty  of  20  per  cent,  ad  valorem  shall  be  levied  on  all  articles 
imported  which  are  now  free,  or  which  bear  a less  duty  than 
that  proposed  in  the  bill,  except  certain  articles  which  are 
left  at  their  present  rates  of  duty,  and  certain  other  excepted 
articles  which  are  to  remain  free.  These  duties  are  to  be 
levied  and  collected  in  the  manner  now  provided  by  law,  with 
some  slight  modification  as  to  teas.  It  will  therefore  be  seen 
that  the  main  object  and  scope  of  the  bill  is  to  raise  revenue, 
and  that  its  provisions  are  strictly  within  the  terms  of  the 
Compromise  Act. 

The  chief  questions,  therefore,  that  present  themselves 
for  our  consideration  are: 

First.  Will  there  be  a deficit  in  the  revenue  for  the  cur- 
rent four  years  under  the  laws  as  they  now  stand,  and  if  so, 
what  additional  amount  will  it  be  necessary  to  provide  to 
meet  the  ordinary  demands  upon  the  Treasury? 

Second.  What  is  the  best  mode  of  supplying  this  deficit, 
and  to  what  extent  will  the  bill  under  consideration  do  it? 
and  is  it  necessary  or  expedient  now  to  act  upon  this  subject? 

I proceed,  then,  in  the  first  place,  to  consider  the  probable 
amount  of  deficit  for  the  four  years  of  the  present  Adminis- 
tration, and  in  doing  this,  I shall  take  no  notice  of  the  loan 
of  $12,000,000  that  has  been  authorized,  but  not  yet  made,  to 
relieve  the  present  urgent  wants  of  the  Treasury,  because, 
if  it  is  made,  it  is  intended  to  be  repaid  during  the  current 
four  years,  and  it  therefore  adds  nothing  to  our  means  for 
the  whole  time. 

In  judging  for  the  future,  we  must  draw  instruction  from 
the  experience  of  the  past ; and  as  our  object  now  is  to  ascer- 
tain, if  practicable,  the  probable  demands  upon  the  Treasury, 
for  the  four  current  years,  we  will  see  what  they  have  been 
for  the  four  past  years  during  the  preceding  Administration. 

Before  proceeding  to  this  investigation,  it  is  proper  that 
I should  here  observe  that,  in  the  remarks  which  I may  have 
occasion  to  submit  in  reference  to  the  past  Administration, 
no  party  allusions  are  intended.  I shall  speak  of  that  Ad- 
ministration freely  as  matter  of  history,  without  one  op- 


172 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


probrious  epithet  or  one  unkind  allusion.  The  People  have 
passed  upon  it,  and  I am  content  with  their  verdict.  It  is 
also  proper  that  I should  say  that,  in  stating  amounts,  I 
shall  generally  content  myself  with  giving  the  round  num- 
bers, seldom  going  below  thousands,  as  a multiplicity  of 
figures  in  debate  rather  serves  to  confuse  than  enlighten. 
And  I shall  proceed  slowly,  that  every  member  who  desires 
may  have  time  to  take  down  my  statements,  for  I neither 
desire  to  deceive  myself  nor  the  members  of  this  House; 
and  if  I have  committed  any  error,  either  in  fact  or  infer- 
ence, no  one  will  be  more  gratified  than  myself  to  have  it 
corrected. 

What,  then,  have  been  the  ordinary  expenses  of  this  Gov- 
ernment for  the  past  four  years?  I have  before  me  House 
Document  No.  31  of  this  session,  which,  at  page  18,  contains 
a table  headed  as  follows : “Statement  of  the  appropriations 
and  expenditures  each  year,  from  1829  to  1840  inclusive,  for 
the  civil  list,  foreign  intercourse,  and  miscellaneous  objects, 
for  the  military  establishment,  pensions,  fortifications,  inter- 
nal improvements,  Indian  department,  and  the  naval  estab- 
lishment, exhibiting  also  the  excess  of  appropriations  over 
expenditure/’ 

At  page  25,  the  total  expenditure  for  these  objects  in  each 
year  is  given,  and  I desire  to  call  the  attention  of  the  com- 
mittee to  them  for  the  past  four  years.  They  are  as  follows : 


In  1837  $ 31,610,000 

In  1838  31,544,000 

In  1839  25,443,000 

In  1840  22,389,000 


Making  a total  in  four  years  of $110,986,000 


Averaging  for  each  year $ 27,746,000 

Thus  showing,  if  the  experience  of  the  past  is  to  be  a 
guide  for  the  future,  that  our  annual  expenditures  for  the 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


173 


current  four  years  will  be  near  twenty-eight  millions  of 
dollars. 

The  next  inquiry  is,  what  amount  of  revenue  we  may 
reasonably  expect  for  the  current  four  years  under  existing 
laws,  assuming,  as  I do  for  this  purpose,  that  the  bill  for  the 
distribution  among  the  States  of  the  proceeds  of  the  public 
lands  will  become  a law.  Our  only  source  of  revenue,  it  will 
be  recollected,  will  then  be  from  customs.  We  have  no  avail- 
able debts  due  us  worth  mentioning,  and  no  funds  on  hand 
worth  taking  into  account ; but  over  and  above  the  ordinary 
current  expenses  of  the  Government,  we  owe  several  millions 
of  Treasury  notes,  and  there  are  large  arrearages  and  un- 
liquidated claims,  which  accrued  under  the  past  Administra- 
tion, many  of  which  will  doubtless  have  to  be  provided  for 
during  the  present.  Besides,  liberal  appropriations  have 
been  called  for  and  made  by  this  House  during  the  present 
session  for  fortifications  and  for  the  navy,  and  to  put  the 
country  in  a proper  state  of  defence.  But  I pass  by  these 
for  the  present,  and  proceed  at  once  to  consider  the  probable 
amount  of  revenue  that  will  come  into  the  Treasury  from 
customs  under  the  laws  as  they  now  stand.  In  order  to 
determine  this,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  Compromise 
Act  goes  fully  into  effect  on  the  first  day  of  July  next,  and 
that,  after  that  day,  no  article  imported  will  pay  higher 
duty  than  20  per  cent,  ad  valorem,  and  it  must  also  be 
borne  in  mind  that  there  is  a long  list  of  articles  that 
pay  a duty,  and  are  therefore  classed  among  dutiable  ar- 
ticles, nevertheless,  by  existing  laws,  the  duty  is  less  than 
20  per  cent. 

But  even  if  we  should  suppose  that  all  goods  imported 
that  pay  any  duty  paid  one  of  20  per  cent,  ad  valorem,  what 
would  be  the  probable  amount  of  revenue  derived  from  this 
source?  Here  again  we  must  recur  to  the  past  to  judge  for 
the  future;  and,  in  determining  this,  I think  it  more  safe 
and  just  to  rely  upon  the  average  amount  of  imports  for  a 
series  of  years  than  to  attempt  to  select  for  any  one  year. 
In  Document  No.  2 of  the  House  of  Representatives  for  the 
present  session,  usually  called  the  “Finance  Report,”  at  page 


174 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


20,  may  be  found  a table  giving  the  whole  amount  of  im- 
ports from  1834  to  1840,  inclusive,  distinguishing  between 
those  “free  of  duty”  and  those  “paying  duty,”  and  giving  the 
average  result  for  the  whole  seven  years. 

[The  table  is  omitted.  It  shows  the  value  of  imports, 
1834  to  1840,  amount  free  of  duty  and  amount  paying  duty, 
year  by  year.] 

I am  the  more  disposed  to  rely  upon  the  average  result 
of  this  statement  because  the  seven  years  embrace  some  of 
the  most  prosperous  and  some  of  the  most  disastrous  known 
to  our  commercial  history  in  times  of  peace.  It  will  be  seen 
that  the  fluctuations  in  different  years  have  been  very  great, 
ranging  from  $107,000,000  to  near  $190,000,000.  But  the 
average  result  shows  that  the  whole  amount  of  imports 
“paying  duty”  over  and  under  20  per  cent,  is  only  $69,- 
748,000,  being  a little  less  than  $70,000,000;  and  when  all 
these  duties  are  reduced  to  20  per  cent.,  as  they  will  be  on 
the  first  day  of  July  next  by  the  Compromise  Act,  then,  even 
supposing  all  paid  that  duty,  which  all  will  not,  the  whole 
amount  of  gross  revenue  derived  from  this  source  would  be 
$T3,959,ooo,  or  less  than  fourteen  millions  of  dollars. 

But  even  all  this,  limited  and  small  as  it  is,  is  not  avail- 
able for  the  ordinary  wants  of  the  Treasury.  That  the  com- 
mittee may  see  the  amount  of  drawbacks,  deductions,  boun- 
ties, and  expenses  of  collection,  all  of  which  ought  to  be 
taken  into  the  account,  in  determining  the  net  amount  of 
revenue  received  into  the  Treasury,  applicable  to  the  ordi- 
nary expenditures  of  the  Government,  I beg  leave  to  call 
their  attention  to  a table,  to  be  found  in  Document  No.  31 
of  this  House,  of  the  present  session,  at  page  29. 

[The  table  is  omitted.  It  shows,  itemized  by  years,  1834 
to  1839  inclusive,  the  amount  of  duties  which  accrued  on 
merchandise  imported ; the  deduction  under  the  Compromise 
Act  of  March  2,  1833 ; the  “drawback”  paid  on  foreign  mer- 
chandise exported ; on  domestic  sugar,  spirits,  etc.,  exported; 
allowances  to  vessels  in  the  fisheries ; expense  of  collection, 
and  net  revenue.] 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


175 


From  this  table  it  will  be  perceived  that  the  average 
amount  of  “actual  duties”  for  six  years,  from  1834  to  1839, 


inclusive  was $23,176,000 

And  the  net  amount  only 18,404,000 

Making  a difference  of $ 4,772,000 


If  the  same  difference  should  exist  after  the  first  day  of 
July  next,  then  from  these  facts  the  matter  would  stand 
thus: 

Gross  amount  of  duties $13,950,000 

Deduct  for  drawbacks,  expenses  of  collection,  etc.  4,772,000 


And  it  leaves  for  net  amount  of  duties. . . .$  9,178,000 

But  I do  not  conceive  this  to  be  precisely  the  mode  of 
coming  at  the  difference  between  the  gross  and  net  amount 
of  duties  as  reduced  under  the  Compromise  Act.  It  is  true 
that  the  “expenses  of  collection”  will  remain  the  same,  as 
the  officers  employed  in  the  custom-house  are  all  salaried 
officers,  whose  compensation  is  not  graduated  at  all  by  the 
amount  of  revenues  collected.  And  at  many  ports  where 
there  are  many  officers,  and  where  they  are  indispensably 
necessary — not  to  collect  the  revenue,  but  to  prevent  smug- 
gling— the  whole  amount  collected  is  not  sufficient  to  pay 
the  officers  employed.  The  “bounties  on  pickled  fish  ex- 
ported” and  the  “allowances  to  vessels  employed  in  the 
fisheries”  being  in  nowise  dependent  on  the  amount  of  rev- 
enue received  from  duties,  will  also  remain  the  same,  but  we 
may  reasonably  suppose  as  the  amount  of  duties  falls  off 
under  the  Compromise  Act,  the  amount  of  “duties  refunded” 
under  the  decisions  of  the  courts,  and  the  amount  of  “draw- 
backs’ “on  foreign  merchandise  exported,”  “on  domestic 
refined  sugar  exported,”  and  “on  domestic  distilled  spirits 
exported,”  will  also  fall  off  in  something  like  the  same  pro- 
portion. But  this  cannot  be  in  reference  to  the  drawback 
on  refined  sugar  and  distilled  spirits  without  some  further 
legislation,  for  the  drawback  on  those  articles  was  gradu- 


176 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


ated  by  the  high  rate  of  duty  imposed  upon  them  prior  to 
the  Compromise  Act;  but  by  the  operations  of  that  act  the 
duty  has  been  constantly  diminishing,  while  the  drawback 
remains  the  same,  so  that  it  now  operates  by  way  of  bounty 
on  the  manufacture  of  those  articles,  and  as  a consequence 
the  manufacture  has  greatly  increased,  being,  as  appears 
from  the  table  to  which  I have  referred,  more  than  double 
in  1839  what  it  was  in  1838.  But  this  bill  is  intended  to 
remedy  that  evil,  and  to  reduce  the  drawback  to  the  amount 
of  the  import  duty. 

Trusting  that  the  committee  will  pardon  this  digression, 
I return  again  to  the  question  I was  considering — what  sum 
should  be  deducted  from  the  gross  amount  of  duties,  esti- 
mated under  the  Compromise  Act  at  near  $14,000,000,  to 
ascertain  the  net  amount  applicable  to  the  ordinary  expenses 
of  the  Government?  I had  shown  that  the 


“Expenses  of  collection” $1,422,000 

“Bounty  on  pickled  fish  exported” 7,000 

Allowances  to  vessels  employed  in  the  fisheries 256,000 


Making  in  all 


$1,685,000 


must  remain  the  same.  The  remaining  items  are : 


Duties  refunded  $ 671,000 

Drawbacks  on  exports 2,256,000 

Drawbacks  on  refined  sugar 148,000 

Drawbacks  on  distilled  spirits 9,000 


Making  a total  of $ 3,084,000 

The  annual  average  gross  amount  of  duties  at 

that  time  was 23,000,000 

Under  the  compromise  act  it  will  be  about 14,000,000 

a little  less  than  two-thirds,  but  it  will  be  near  enough  for 
my  purpose  to  call  it  two-thirds. 

Then,  one-third  of  $3,084,000  is  $1,028,000;  which  de- 
ducted from  $3,084,000,  leaves $2,056,000 


Which,  added  to  the  above,  makes 


$3,741,000 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


177 


Then,  according  to  this  calculation,  taking  the  law  as  it 
now  stands,  and  judging  of  the  future  by  the  past,  the  cal- 
culation stands  thus: 

Probable  annual  expenditure $27,697,000 

Gross  amount  of  duties  after  July  1,  1842. ..  .$13,950,000 
Deduct  for  expenses  of  collection,  drawbacks, 

etc 3,741,000 


Making  your  net  revenue  per  annum....  10,209,000 

And  leaving  an  annual  deficit  of $17,488,000 

And  this,  too,  independent  of  the  public  debt  created  by 
the  past  Administration,  and  which  ought  to  be  paid  off 
during  the  present. 

The  revenues  will  be  more  than  this  for  the  current  year, 
as  the  avails  of  the  public  lands  are  to  be  paid  into  the 
Treasury  until  the  first  day  of  January  next,  and  the  re- 
ducing effect  of  the  Compromise  Act,  of  which  I shall  have 
occasion  to  speak  more  particularly  hereafter,  will  not  be  so 
sensibly  felt  until  the  first  day  of  January  and  the  first  day 
of  July  next. 

But  it  may  be  asked,  if  the  amount  of  accruing  revenues 
under  existing  laws  are  to  be  so  small,  and  the  expenditures 
of  the  past  Administration  have  been  so  great,  how  have 
they  been  enabled  to  meet  the  demands  upon  the  Treasury? 

This  is  a very  natural  and  fair  inquiry,  and  I therefore 
anticipate  it,  with  the  view  of  answering  it.  The  truth  is, 
that  the  past  Administration  had  certain  resources  and 
means,  which  are  either  exhausted  or  upon  which  we  can  no 
longer  rely,  or  to  which  we  do  not  desire  to  resort,  from 
which  it  derived  the  means  of  making  the  expenditures  to 
which  I have  alluded.  And  I desire  to  call  the  attention  of 
the  committee  particularly  to  three  particular  and  extraordi- 
nary sources  of  revenue  which  the  past  Administration  en- 
joyed, and  upon  which  we  can  no  longer  depend. 

The  first  is  the  amount  of  money  which  was  in  the  Treas- 
ury on  the  1st  day  of  January,  1837,  and  the  debts  then  due 


178 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


the  Government  which  have  been  collected  and  the  money 
used,  and  the  amount  borrowed  on  Treasury  notes  and  used 
up,  which  had  a double  effect,  by  increasing  the  means  of 
the  past  Administration,  and  throwing  an  undue  burden 
upon  the  present.  The  amount  of  these  means  in  round 
numbers  was  $31,310,000;  and  that  the  committee  may  see 
a clear  statement  of  them,  I call  their  attention  to  House 
Document  No.  2 of  the  present  session,  being  “Finance 
Report,”  at  page  5,  where  they  will  find  the  following  state- 
ment on  this  subj  ect : 

From  the  year  1816  to  1837,  a period  of  twenty-one  years, 
the  revenues  constantly  exceeded  the  expenditures.  The 
average  annual  surplus  during  that  time  was  $11,464,226.87 
(see  tables  1 and  2),  making  an  aggregate  excess  of  $240,- 
748,764.27.  Within  that  time  there  was  applied  to  the  ex- 
tinction of  the  national  debt  $208,792,127.44,  and  there  was, 
under  the  provisions  of  the  act  of  the  23d  June,  1836,  de- 
posited with  the  States  $28,101,644.91,  and  there  remained, 
on  the  1st  of  January,  1837,  in  the  Treasury  of  the  United 
States,  including  the  fourth  instalment  due  to  the  States,  a 
surplus  of  $17,109,473.26. 

There  were  also  outstanding  debts  due  and  falling  due  to 
the  Treasury  arising  from  other  sources  than  those  of  the 
ordinary  revenue,  and  which  were  paid  between  the  1st  of 
January,  1837,  and  4th  of  March,  1841,  to  the  amount  of 
$9,124,747.00. 

There  were  also  issued  within  that  period,  and  outstand- 
ing on  the  4th  of  March,  1841,  Treasury  notes  to  the  amount 
of  $5,648,512.40. 

Making  the  aggregate  available  means  which  were  in  the 
Treasury  on  the  1st  of  January,  1837,  and  which  came  into 
it  prior  to  the  4th  of  March,  1841,  over  and  above  the  cur- 
rent revenues,  $31,882,732.66. 

From  which  deduct  the  amount  (less  the  trust  funds) 
remaining  in  the  Treasury  on  the  4th  of  March,  1841, 
$572,718.46. 

And  there  appears  an  excess  of  expenditure  over  the 
current  revenue  of  $31,310,014.20. 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


179 


Here,  then,  is  an  amount  of  more  than  $31,000,000  re- 
ceived and  expended  by  the  past  Administration  from 
sources  from  which  we  have  little  or  nothing  to  expect. 
They  had  in  the  Treasury,  on  the  1st  of  January,  1837,  more 
than  $17,000,000,  all  of  which  has  been  expended;  and  they 
only  left  on  the  4th  of  March  last,  as  appears  by  the  above 
statement,  the  small  sum  of  $572,000,  a sum  comparatively 
too  trifling  to  be  worth  mentioning. 

But  this  is  not  all.  We  had  then  due  us  a large  debt  for 
the  sale  of  our  stock  in  the  United  States  Bank,  and  of  that 
they  have  collected  and  expended  during  the  past  Adminis- 
tration more  than  $9,000,000 ; and  the  little  balance,  if  any, 
that  is  due  is  too  trifling  to  be  taken  into  the  account.  This 
is  also  gone.  But  even  this  is  not  all ; they  borrowed  more 
than  $5,000,000  on  Treasury  notes,  and  have  expended  the 
money,  and  left  the  debt  to  be  paid  by  the  present  or  some 
succeeding  Administration.  We  have  nothing  to  expect 
from  this  source,  unless  we  are  willing  to  go  on  and  increase 
this  public  debt.  For  one,  I am  not ; I rather  prefer  to  pro- 
vide the  means  to  pay  it  off.  Here,  then,  are  $31,310,000 
received  by  the  past  Administration  from  sources  from 
which  we  have  nothing  to  expect ; but  in  striking  the  balance 
between  the  two  Administrations,  and  estimating  the  means 
that  ought  to  be  provided  for  the  present  to  put  it  on  a par 
with  the  last,  we  ought  to  add  this  Treasury  note  debt  to  the 
above  sum,  which  would  make  it  $36,958,000,  for,  although 
we  have  charged  it  to  their  means  above,  yet  it  is  to  take  so 
much  from  our  ordinary  means  if  we  pay  it;  and  I trust 
we  shall. 

This,  then,  sir,  is  one  item,  and  I now  call  the  attention  of 
the  committee  to  another.  I mean  the  avails  of  the  public 
lands.  As  the  bill  that  passed  this  House  distributing  them 
among  the  States  has  not  been  rejected  by  the  Senate,  I 
feel  bound  to  assume,  and  so  must  this  House,  in  estimating 
for  the  ways  and  means  to  carry  on  the  Government,  that 
that  bill  will  become  a law,  and  will,  after  the  first  day  of 
January  next,  restore  the  proceeds  of  these  lands  to  the 
People  of  the  several  States,  to  whom  they  justly  belong. 


180 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


And,  in  passing,  I may  be  permitted  to  say,  sir,  that  I voted 
for  that  bill,  not  as  a financial  measure,  but  as  a matter  of 
right  to  the  States,  and  as  a great  conservative  measure, 
rendered  necessary  by  the  course  of  events  to  preserve  this 
great  and  rich  patrimony  for  the  people  to  whom  it  belongs, 
and  to  prevent  its  being  squandered  and  gambled  away  by 
trading  politicians  and  reckless  demagogues.  It  was  fast 
becoming  a great  corruption  fund  that  it  was  necessary  to 
restore  to  its  rightful  owner,  that  it  might  be  guarded  from 
the  corrupt  temptations  of  avarice,  and  the  still  more  baneful 
and  dangerous  influences  of  inordinate  and  time-serving 
ambition.  I only  regret  that  this  could  not  have  been  done 
at  a more  auspicious  moment  for  the  public  Treasury.  But 
the  object  to  be  attained  was,  in  my  mind,  far  above  any 
temporary  inconvenience  that  might  arise  to  the  Treasury, 
and,  therefore,  I gave  it  a most  cordial  support. 

During  the  four  years  of  the  past  Administration,  there 
was  paid  into  the  Treasury  from  the  avails  of  the  public 
lands,  $20,226,000.  At  page  3,  document  2,  the  Secretary 
estimates  the  amount  to  be  received  from  the  public  lands 
this  year,  from  March  4th  to  January  1st,  at  $2,500,000; 
which,  deducted  from  the  receipts  of  the  preceding  four 
years,  leaves  $17,726,000;  being  almost  $18,000,000  more 
from  this  source  than  the  present  Administration  can  calcu- 
late upon. 

But  this  is  not  all.  There  is  another  source  of  revenue  of 
vast  importance,  which  was  enjoyed  by  the  past  Administra- 
tion, which  is  about  to  be  cut  off  under  the  operation  of  the 
Compromise  Act.  In  order  that  I may  explain  this  fully,  it 
is  necessary  that  I should  go  something  into  detail  as  respects 
the  provisions  of  that  act.  We  all  know  that  this  act  was 
passed  on  the  2d  of  March,  1833,  being  the  final  compromise 
between  constitutional  power  on  one  side  and  nullification 
on  the  other.  I do  not  propose  to  speak  of  its  merits,  much 
less  of  the  merits  of  the  controversy  out  of  which  it  grew ; 
and  I only  intend  now  to  speak  of  its  provisions  so  far  as 
they  affect  the  revenue  arising  from  duties. 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


181 


With  the  view  of  reducing  all  duties  to  a maximum  of  20 
per  cent,  ad  valorem , this  act  provided  that,  on  the  1st  day 
of  January,  1834,  one-tenth  of  the  duties  over  20  per  cent, 
on  all  articles  imported  should  be  taken  off,  and  on  the  1st 
day  of  January,  1836,  another  tenth,  and  on  the  1st  day  of 
January,  1838,  another  tenth,  and  on  the  1st  day  of  January, 
1840,  another  tenth,  and  on  the  1st  day  of  January,  1842, 
three-tenths  more,  and  on  the  1st  day  of  July,  1842,  the  re- 
maining three-tenths  should  be  deducted ; so  that  after  that 
day  no  article  imported  should  bear  a higher  duty  than  20 
per  cent,  ad  valorem.  It  will  thus  be  perceived  that,  under 
the  operations  of  this  act,  four-tenths  of  the  duties  above  20 
per  cent,  have  already  been  deducted,  and  that  three-tenths 
more  will  be  deducted  on  the  1st  day  of  January  next,  and 
the  remaining  three-tenths  on  the  1st  day  of  July  next. 

In  order  to  determine  how  this  affects  the  revenue,  it  is 
necessary  to  ascertain  how  much  these  deductions  take  off 
from  the  duties  on  imports.  By  a reference  to  a table  to 
which  I have  already  called  the  attention  of  the  committee, 
in  House  Document  No.  31,  at  page  29,  in  the  second 
column  of  that  table,  it  will  be  seen  what  the  deduction  has 
been  under  this  act  from  1834  to  1839  inclusive. 

Let  us  first  see  what  the  average  deduction  has  been  for 
every  10th,  and  then  see  its  average  for  every  year.  The 
table  furnishes  the  following  basis  for  this  estimate : 


In  1834,  i-ioth  was  deducted,  amounting  to $ 689,723  12 

In  1835,  i-ioth  was  deducted,  amounting  to 959,255  50 

In  1836,  2-ioths  were  deducted,  amounting  to 2,086,281  04 

In  1837,  2-ioths  were  deducted,  amounting  to 1,465,182  20 

In  1838,  3-ioths  were  deducted,  amounting  to 2,630,424  40 

In  1839,  3-ioths  were  deducted,  amounting  to 3,158,460  51 


Total  deducted  $10,889,326  77 

Total  of  ioths — 12. 


Now,  if  we  divide  the  aggregate  of  deductions  by  the 
tenths  which  produced  it,  the  average  amount  of  each  tenth 
will  be  $907,444. 

This,  then,  furnishes  an  easy  rule  by  which  to  determine 
what  was  deducted  during  the  past  Administration,  and 


182 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


what  will  be  deducted  during  the  present,  and  the  difference 
will  be  the  amount  which  the  past  Administration  received 
and  expended  from  a source  from  which  the  present  can 
receive  nothing. 

In  1837,  2-ioths  were  deducted,  being  twice  $907,444 $ 1,814,888 

In  1838,  3-ioths  were  deducted,  being  three  times  $907,444  2,722,332 

In  1839,  3-ioths  were  deducted,  being  four  times  $907,444  2,722,332 

In  1840,  4-ioths  were  deducted,  being  four  times  $907,444  3,629,776 


Making  a total  of  deductions  during  the  past  Admin- 
istration of  $10,889,328 


Now  let  us  see  the  amount  of  deductions  by  the  same 
process  for  the  current  four  years : 

In  1841,  4-ioths  are  to  be  deducted,  being  four  times 

$907,444  $ 3,629,776 

In  1842,  7-ioths  for  half  a year,  being  seven  times  $453,722  3,076,054 

In  1842,  io-ioths  for  half  a year,  being  ten  times  $453,722  4,537,220 

In  1843,  io-ioths  for  the  whole,  being  ten  times  $907,444  9,074,440 

In  1844,  io-ioths  for  the  whole,  being  ten  times  $907,444  9,074,440 

Making  a total  of $29,391,930 

From  which  take  the  amount  deducted  during  the  past 

Administration  10,889,328 

And  it  leaves $18,502,602 

which  the  past  Administration  has  received  from  customs, 
more  than  can  be  received  by  the  present  Administra- 
tion as  the  law  now  stands : all  of  which  is  gone. 

Add  to  this  the  first  sum  mentioned,  minus  the  debt  they 

left  for  their  successors 31,310,000 

Add  also  the  amount  which  they  received  from  the  public 
lands  more  than  can  be  received  by  the  present  Ad- 
ministration, as  I have  stated 17,726,000 

Making  in  all $67,538,602 


All  of  which  has  been  received  and  expended  during  the 
past  Administration ; and  that  too  from  sources  from  which 
the  present  Administration  has  nothing  to  expect.  This  is 
equal  to  $16,884,000  for  each  year  of  that  Administration. 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


183 


In  other  words,  had  they  come  into  power  with  no  other 
means  or  resources  than  what  the  present  Administration 
has — assuming  that  the  land  bill  becomes  a law — they  would 
have  left  the  Treasury  empty,  and  incurred  a national  debt 
of  $67,538,000. 

Comment  upon  this  state  of  things  is  unnecessary.  It  is 
clear  that  the  Administration  cannot  go  on  so.  Something 
must  be  done  to  replenish  an  exhausted  Treasury  and  to 
maintain  the  good  faith  of  the  Government.  I shall  not 
assume  to  say  what  the  amount  of  deficit  in  the  Treasury 
will  be,  but  the  bare  statement  of  the  case  shows  that  it  must 
necessarily  be  very  large.  It  calls  loudly  upon  us  for  re- 
trenchment and  reform — not  that  retrenchment  that  is  heard 
in  strong  professions  before  election,  and  is  never  heard  of 
afterward,  but  for  thorough,  practical  retrenchment,  by 
which  every  unnecessary  office  shall  be  abolished,  and  every 
salary  that  is  too  high  cut  down,  and  a system  of  rigid  econ- 
omy and  accountability  in  the  expenditures  of  the  public 
money  adopted.  I hope  my  friend  from  Virginia  [Mr. 
Gilmer]  will,  by  the  investigations  of  his  select  committee, 
show  us  how  much  money  may  be  saved.  But  all  this  is  a 
work  of  time.  Investigations  must  first  be  had  and  then 
laws  passed  before  any  of  these  retrenchments  can  be  real- 
ized. In  the  meantime  our  expenses  are  accruing,  and  we 
have  no  means  of  meeting  them.  We  must  look  these  things 
in  the  face.  We  must  meet  this  crisis  as  best  we  can.  No 
matter  by  whom  the  governmental  machine  has  been  per- 
mitted to  get  out  of  repair  and  run  down,  it  is  now  in  our 
charge,  and  we  are  bound  to  repair  it,  and  set  it  in  motion. 
On  us,  whether  friends  or  foes  to  the  present  Administra- 
tion, rests  this  responsibility,  and  we  cannot  absolve  our- 
selves from  it.  Our  country’s  honor  is  involved,  and  I have 
no  apprehensions  that  my  constituents  will  not  cheerfully 
and  promptly  meet  the  additional  demands  which  it  may  be 
necessary  to  make  upon  their  means  to  supply  the  wants  of 
this  Government  when  it  is  economically  administered ; and 
when  they  think  it  is  not,  they  will  turn  out  the  unfaithful 
stewards  and  put  more  trustworthy  ones  in  their  places.  But 


184 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


they  will  pay  the  honest  creditor  of  the  Government,  even 
though  the  steward  may  have  proved  unworthy  of  his  trust. 
And  I claim  no  more  patriotism  or  magnanimity  for  my  con- 
stituents in  this  matter  than  I am  willing  to  grant  to  those  of 
every  other  member  upon  this  floor. 

But,  before  I pass  from  this  subject,  I beg  leave  to  say, 
that,  in  making  up  our  minds  as  to  the  amount  of  additional 
revenue  that  may  be  wanted  to  meet  the  probable  demands 
upon  the  Treasury  for  the  current  years,  while  we  flatter 
ourselves  with  the  retrenchments  we  may  effect,  not  only  in 
the  few  expenditures  to  which  I have  alluded,  but  possibly 
by  putting  an  end  to  that  most  inglorious,  unfortunate,  and 
ruinous  of  all  wars — I mean  that  with  the  Florida  Indians — 
yet  it  must  also  be  borne  in  mind  that  we  have  to  provide  for 
the  debt  incurred  during  the  last  four  years,  and  that  the 
practice  has  been  for  several  years  past  to  stave  off  all  pri- 
vate claims  without  much  regard  to  their  merit,  many  of 
which  are  doubtless  just  and  should  be  paid,  and  that  several 
of  the  States,  particularly  Maine,  Georgia,  Alabama,  and 
Louisiana,  have  large  claims  accruing  under  the  past  Ad- 
ministration, which,  if  just  and  legal,  must  be  paid,  inde- 
pendent of  the  nameless  and  numberless  unliquidated  claims 
growing  out  of  the  Florida  war  and  the  removal  of  the 
Indians,  many  of  which  are  doubtless  just  and  must  be  paid. 
I barely  mention  these  among  the  numerous  demands  that 
may  be  made  upon  the  Treasury  of  an  extraordinary  char- 
acter during  the  current  four  years,  to  show  that  we  cannot 
estimate  the  probable  amount. 

But  the  next  question  is.  How  is  this  deficit  to  be  sup- 
plied, whether  you  call  it  $16,000,000  or  $18,000,000  per 
year,  or  more  or  less  ? It  is  clear  there  must  be  a large  deficit 
that  must  be  supplied  from  some  source,  and  I know  of  but 
three  modes  in  which  it  can  be  done.  First.  You  may  bor- 
row. Second.  You  may  lay  a direct  tax  upon  the  property 
of  the  country.  Or,  third,  you  may  lay  a duty  upon  goods 
now  imported  free,  and  upon  those  bearing  a less  duty  than 
20  per  cent. — equal  to  20  per  cent. — and  in  that  way  supply 
the  wants  of  the  Treasury  to  the  extent  of  those  means. 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


185 


I shall  enter  into  no  argument  to  show  that  we  ought  not 
to  depend  upon  borrowing  to  supply  the  ordinary  wants  of 
the  Treasury.  We  have  tried  that,  more  or  less,  for  the  last 
four  years,  and  have  finally  funded  the  debt  with  a view  of 
paying  it  off  during  the  current  four  years.  A public  debt  is 
justly  odious  to  the  people  of  this  country,  and  I am  un- 
willing to  see  it  increased,  except  from  absolute  necessity. 

The  next  mode  is  by  a direct  tax.  The  gentleman  from 
South  Carolina  [Mr.  Rhett]  and  my  colleague  from  New 
York  [Mr.  McKeon]  spoke  in  favor  of  this  mode  of  supply- 
ing the  Treasury  a day  or  two  since;  and  I apprehend  there 
are  very  few  members  on  this  floor  who  would  advocate  that 
doctrine. 

[Here  Mr.  McKeon  rose  to  explain,  but  as  Mr.  Fillmore’s 
hour  was  nearly  exhausted,  he  declined  yielding  the  floor.] 

I shall  be  happy  to  hear  that  I have  mistaken  my  col- 
league. Let  those  who  prefer  direct  taxation  to  indirect  by 
customs,  look  at  England,  where  they  both  prevail,  and  see 
the  picture  of  inquisitorial  intrusion  and  official  insolence 
and  violence  to  which  their  excise  system  naturally  leads, 
and  I think  he  will  prefer  duties  to  excise  or  direct  taxation. 

The  only  remaining  mode  is  by  duties  as  proposed  in  this 
bill ; and  this  brings  me  to  speak  directly  upon  the  merits  of 
the  measure  itself.  I beg  leave  to  call  the  attention  of  the 
committee  to  the  views  entertained  by  the  present  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  on  this  subject.  They  will  be  found  in 
Document  No.  2 of  this  House,  usually  called  the  “Finance 
Report,”  at  page  6,  where,  after  speaking  of  the  embarrass- 
ments of  the  Treasury  and  the  public  debt  already  accrued, 
and  the  constant  increase  of  both,  he  says : 

“But  as  it  may  not  comport  with  the  views  of  Congress  to  go 
into  a revision  and  adjustment  of  the  customs  so  long  before  the 
act  of  March  2,  1833,  comes  to  have  its  final  and  permanent  opera- 
tion, the  undersigned  would  respectfully  recommend,  as  a tempor- 
ary measure,  the  levy  of  a duty  of  20  per  cent,  ad  valorem  on  all 
articles  which  are  now  free  of  duty,  or  which  pay  a less  duty  than 
20  per  cent.,  except  gold  and  silver,  and  the  articles  specifically 
enumerated  in  the  5th  section  of  the  act  of  March  2,  1833. 


186 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


“If  this  measure  be  adopted,  it  is  estimated  that  there  will  be 
received  into  the  Treasury  from  customs,  in  the  last  quarter  of  the 
present  year,  about  $5,300,000;  in  all  of  the  year  1842,  about  $22,- 
500,000;  and  in  the  year  1843,  after  the  final  reduction  under  the 
act  of  March  2,  1833,  about  $20,800,000.  The  details  of  this  estimate 
will  be  found  in  the  accompanying  paper,  marked  E,  and  enclosures.” 

These  are  the  views  of  the  present  Secretary,  Mr. 
Ewing ; and  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  have,  in  the 
main,  concurred  in  them,  and  the  bill  under  consideration  is 
intended  to  carry  them  out.  But  the  members  of  this  House, 
on  a measure  of  so  much  importance,  may  desire  to  know 
what  were  the  views  of  the  late  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
on  this  subject.  I am  happy  to  have  it  in  my  power  to 
gratify  them  in  this  respect.  Mr.  Woodbury,  the  late  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  made  a report  to  the  Senate  on  this 
subject,  dated  January  18,  1841,  which  is  No.  93  of  State 
Documents,  second  session  of  the  Twenty-sixth  Congress, 
and  to  which  I invited  the  special  attention  of  every  member 
of  this  committee,  that  he  may  see  how  well  these  two  secre- 
taries agree  on  this  subject.  Indeed,  I cannot  well  see  how 
they  could  disagree,  for  both  knew  the  exhausted  state  of 
the  Treasury,  and  no  rational  man  could  doubt  as  to  the 
mode  of  replenishing  it.  The  only  chance  of  difference 
among  statesmen  and  financiers  must  be  as  to  the  particular 
articles  that  should  be  selected  from  the  free  list  on  which 
to  impose  duties.  Mr.  Woodbury  gives  what  he  calls  a list 
of  all  free  articles,  and  then  says  a duty  of  15  per  cent,  on 
them  would  raise  the  required  amount,  but  thinks  it  objec- 
tionable, and  finally  says,  at  page  6 : 

“Another  mode  of  raising  the  same  amount  of  revenue  would 
therefore  be  preferable,  if  it  could  be  accomplished  without  includ- 
ing those  articles.  Suppose,  then,  that  there  should  be  selected  from 
the  free  articles  those  which  may  be  regarded  most  as  luxuries, 
though  not  in  every  respect  belonging  exclusively  to  that  class ; such 
are  tea,  coffee,  and  silks : should  we  then  add  to  them  others,  con- 
flicting with  similar  American  productions,  such  as  worsteds,  linens, 
&c.,  and  the  aggregate  deducting  the  amount  re-exported  would  be 
$29,026,448.  See  the  second  table  B.  A duty  of  20  per  cent,  on 
those,  after  paying  the  expenses  of  collections,  would  yield  about 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


187 


the  same  amount  of  five  millions.  This,  seems  to  contain  the  gen- 
eral data  for  the  most  eligible  and  unexceptionable  revision.” 

[Mr.  Fillmore  here  presented  statistics  from  “table  B,” 
with  a list  of  articles  on  which  a twenty  per  cent,  duty  was 
recommended  to  be  levied.] 

Thus  you  have  the  plan  of  the  late  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  Mr.  Woodbury,  for  the  revision  of  the  tariff,  in 
order  to  supply  the  deficiency  in  the  Treasury,  which  he  has 
styled  “the  most  eligible  and  unexceptionable  revision.” 

I now  call  the  attention  of  the  committee  to  so  much  of 
tables  Nos.  i,  2,  3 and  4,  in  House  Document  No.  31  of  this 
session,  as  is  necessary  to  show  the  articles  upon  which  the 
proposed  bill  will  operate,  and  the  probable  amount  of  duties 
to  be  raised  thereby.  The  tables  explain  themselves,  and  are 
arranged  in  this  manner,  because,  as  I am  informed,  this  is 
the  mode  in  which  the  accounts  are  kept  at  the  Treasury. 
The  first  table  gives  those  articles  now  free  that  usually  pay 
an  ad  valorem  duty.  The  second,  those  now  free  that 
usually  pay  a specific  duty,  with  the  estimate  of  a specific 
duty  equal  to  the  ad  valorem  duty.  The  third,  those  wines 
that  now  pay  a specific  duty,  with  the  increased  revenue  that 
would  arise  from  an  ad  valorem  duty.  And  the  fourth, 
gives  a list  of  those  articles  that  now  pay  a less  duty  than  20 
per  cent,  ad  valorem,  which,  under  this  bill,  will  be  raised  to 
that  amount.  These  tables  have  been  prepared  at  the  Treas- 
ury Department  by  order  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and 
Means,  and  are  presumed  to  be  correct,  and  so  much  of  them 
as  is  necessary  to  illustrate  this  subject  I here  give: 

[A  mass  of  figures  drawn  from  the  reports  of  the  Treas- 
ury Department,  was  here  introduced.  The  tables  give  in 
detail  the  value  of  articles  imported  free,  in  1840,  and  the 
amount  of  duty  which  would  accrue  on  the  same  articles, 
under  the  proposed  tariff.  The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
estimated  a net  annual  revenue,  under  the  bill,  after  1842, 
of  $20,890,000.] 


188 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL. 


I cannot  now  enter  into  the  reasons  for  or  against  the 
selected  articles  for  the  imposition  of  duties.  Though  all 
would  agree  in  the  propriety  of  some  discrimination,  no  two 
would  perhaps  think  alike  as  to  every  article.  No  uniform 
rule  can  be  established  on  this  subject.  Every  case  must 
stand  or  fall  upon  its  own  merits ; and  what  might  be  very 
proper  at  one  time  might  be  equally  improper  at  another.  I 
doubt  not  some  will  be  for  including  many  articles  which  are 
exempt,  and  others  will  be  for  exempting  many  articles  that 
are  included.  The  committee  were  not  unanimous  on  these 
subjects,  and  it  cannot  be  expected  the  House  will  be.  I 
anticipate  a motion  to  exempt  tea  and  coffee,  and  I will  say 
one  word  on  that  subject.  Tea  and  coffee  are  hardly  neces- 
saries ; they  rather  belong  to  the  class  of  luxuries.  So  Mr. 
Woodbury  considered  them,  and  therefore  recommended 
them  for  taxation.  We  can  hardly  justify  ourselves  in  tax- 
ing the  necessary  food  and  clothing  of  the  poor  man,  both  of 
which  are  indispensable  to  sustain  life,  and  still  exempt  tea 
and  coffee.  Let  us  also  consider  that  the  duties  on  these 
articles,  by  the  proposed  bill,  is  so  light  that  those  who 
luxuriate  over  a good  cup  of  tea  or  coffee  will  never  know 
it.  It  will  be  seen,  by  table  No.  2,  that  a duty  of  20  per  cent, 
on  tea  is  less,  on  an  average,  than  five  and  a half  cents  per 
pound;  whereas,  by  the  act  of  1816,  the  duty  ranged  from 
twelve,  to  sixty-eight  cents  per  pound.  And  on  coffee  it  is 
less  than  two  cents  per  pound;  but,  by  the  act  of  1816,  it 
was  five  cents.  These  are  duties  that  will  never  be  felt  by 
the  consumer.  Were  he  not  told  of  it,  he  would  never  know 
it.  Again : if  you  exempt  these  articles,  you  cannot  raise 
means  enough  to  carry  on  the  Government.  They  will  be 
quite  inadequate,  I fear,  with  them  in;  and  by  subtracting 
them  you  take  away  near  three  million  dollars,  and  almost 
one-third  of  the  whole  amount  proposed  to  be  raised.  In 
Great  Britain,  where  about  $100,000,000  is  annually  raised 
from  duties,  more  than  one-half  of  this  enormous  sum  is 
raised  on  three  articles — tea,  sugar,  and  tobacco — none  of 
which  is  produced  in  Great  Britain.  It  appears  also  that  we 
consume  more  than  five  times  as  much  coffee,  per  head,  as 


ON  THE  REVENUE  BILL 


189 


the  inhabitants  of  that  country.  But  I have  not  time  to 
dwell  upon  it. 

I have  a few  words  to  say  as  to  the  form  of  the  bill.  Con- 
trary to  our  tariff  laws  heretofore  passed,  it  names  the 
articles  excepted  from  duty  instead  of  those  on  which  the 
duty  is  imposed.  This  would  be  impossible  when  specific 
duties  are  imposed,  and  can  only  be  done  when  the  duties  are 
ad  valorem.  It  is  done  in  this  case  to  prevent  fraud.  Ex- 
perience has  shown  that  where  you  name  the  articles  on 
which  duties  are  laid,  there  is  a constant  effort  on  the  part 
of  the  foreign  manufacturer  to  invent  some  new  article  and 
give  it  a new  name,  that  can  be  imported  free,  and  which 
may  come  in  as  a substitute  for  the  dutiable  article.  This 
bill  takes  away  all  temptation  to  commit  that  fraud ; for  the 
article,  unless  excepted  in  the  free  list,  must  pay  a duty. 

I have  one  word  to  say  as  to  the  necessity  of  immediate 
action.  If  we  do  not  act  now,  but  postpone  this  indispensable 
revenue  measure  until  the  next  session,  and  then  mingle  it 
up  with  the  tariff,  it  is  not  at  all  probable  it  will  become  a 
law  until  a year  from  this  time.  A whole  year  will  thus  be 
lost,  which  is  of  vast  importance  where  the  fruits  of  a meas- 
ure are  so  slow  in  coming  to  maturity,  and  the  demand  is  so 
pressing.  Nothing  can  be  realized  under  this  act  after  it 
takes  effect  short  of  three  months,  and  half  of  it  not  short 
of  six;  and  on  teas,  one  of  the  most  important  articles,  a 
year’s  credit  may  be  given.  I deem  it,  therefore,  indis- 
pensable, unless  we  would  disgrace  the  country  and  the 
Administration,  and  this  act  should  be  passed  at  this  session, 
that  an  exhausted  Treasury  may  derive  some  benefit  from  it 
next  winter  and  spring,  and  not  suffer  it  to  be  postponed  a 
year  longer. 

I beg  leave  to  say,  in  conclusion,  that  I hope  this  revenue 
measure  will  not  be  mingled  up  with  questions  of  protection, 
home  valuations,  and  cash  duties.  I hope  all  those  important 
but  perplexing  questions  will  be  postponed  to  the  next 
session,  when  we  shall  have  more  time  and  more  informa- 
tion, and  may  be  in  a better  situation  to  dispose  of  them 
properly  for  the  interest  of  all  concerned. 


190 


POWERS  OF  THE  EXECUTIVE. 


TEA  AND  COFFEE  DUTIES. 

July  26,  1841,  on  the  bill  “in  relation  to  duties  and  draw- 
backs,” it  being  proposed  to  amend  by  including  tea  and 
coffee  among  articles  exempted  from  the  operation  thereof, 
Mr.  Fillmore  said: 

He  understood  his  friend  from  Pennsylvania  [Mr.  Law- 
rence] to  say  that  the  duties  he  proposed  to  strike  out  might 
be  levied  on  other  articles.  The  gentleman  did  not  say  what 
articles,  but  he  referred  to  articles  of  luxury  generally,  and 
specified  watches  and  jewelry.  Now  these  articles  had  been 
taxed  for  years,  and  the  policy  of  the  Government  had  been 
to  tax  them  to  the  utmost ; but  they  were  of  such  value,  and 
so  light  and  portable,  that  they  were  liable  to  be  smuggled 
if  a high  rate  of  duty  were  placed  upon  them.  In  short,  it 
would  be  impossible  to  prevent  the  smuggling  of  watches 
and  jewelry  and  particularly  of  gold  and  silver  and  dia- 
monds. It  would  defeat  the  object  in  view  to  impose  a high 
duty  on  these  articles,  for  it  would  give  encouragement  to 
the  knave  and  injure  the  business  of  the  honest  importer. 
It  had  been  found  from  practical  experience,  that  a high 
duty  could  not  be  safely  put  on  these  articles.  It  was  dif- 
ferent, however,  with  tea  and  coffee.  They  entered  into  the 
general  consumption  of  the  country,  and  were  so  bulky  as  to 
present  a formidable  obstacle  to  smuggling.  He  did  not  see 
why  tea  and  coffee  particularly  should  be  exempted  while 
food  and  clothing  were  taxed ; and  a duty  of  20  per  cent 
would  be  so  light  on  these  articles  as  to  be  scarcely  felt. 

POWERS  OF  THE  EXECUTIVE. 

On  the  bill  making  further  provision  for  the  suppression 
of  Indian  hostilities  in  Florida  (July  29th),  Mr.  Fillmore 
spoke,  urging  its  reference  to  the  Committee  on  Military 
Affairs.  The  subject  of  giving  this  power  [to  raise  volun- 
teer forces]  to  the  President  had  been  very  much  discussed 
at  the  last  Congress.  The  President  already  had  power, 
under  standing  laws,  to  call  out  the  militia  when  he  should 


ON  A UNIFORM  BANKRUPT  LAW. 


191 


deem  it  necessary,  and  the  question  was  whether  that  power 
should  now  be  so  changed  as  to  authorize  the  President  to 
receive  volunteers.  He  knew  that  this  might  create  a great 
charge  upon  the  Treasury,  but  he  thought  the  bill  should 
undergo  consideration  of  a standing  committee. 

A DIPLOMATIC  INCIDENT. 

Discussion  arose,  August  5,  1841,  over  the  fact  that  the 
French  Minister  had  addressed  a communication  in  regard 
to  certain  pending  legislation,  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treas- 
ury, instead  of  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  the  proper  diplo- 
matic channel  for  such  communication.  Mr.  Fillmore  spoke 
at  some  length,  stating  in  detail  the  circumstances  of  the 
case,  exonerating  the  French  Minister  from  discourtesy.  As 
the  communication  referred  to  commercial  affairs,  the 
French  Minister,  Mr.  Fillmore  presumed,  had  thought  it 
should  properly  be  sent  to  the  fiscal  officer  of  our  Govern- 
ment. After  further  statement,  the  subject  was  tabled. 

ON  THE  BILL  TO  ESTABLISH  A UNIFORM  BANKRUPT  LAW. 

On  Monday,  August  16,  1841,  Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  in 
substance  as  follows: 

I had  no  expectation,  until  the  introduction  of  the  resolu- 
tion this  morning,  to  take  this  bill  out  of  committee  at  12 
o'clock,  that  the  debate  was  to  cease  so  soon.  I had  intended 
to  submit  some  remarks  on  the  subject,  but  this  morning 
others  have  been  more  fortunate  than  myself  in  catching 
the  eye  of  the  chair.  We  have  now  but  twenty-five  minutes 
left,  and  for  this  I am  mainly  indebted  to  my  friend  from 
Massachusetts  [Mr.  Saltonstall] , and  even  this  I must  divide 
with  my  friend  from  Georgia  [Mr.  Dawson]. 

Under  these  circumstances,  I can  go  into  no  constitutional 
questions,  nor  can  I discuss  the  details  of  this  measure.  I 
can  only  say  that  I deem  it  one  of  great  importance,  and  that 
I feel  a great  anxiety  for  its  success. 


192 


ON  A UNIFORM  BANKRUPT  LAW. 


The  labors  imposed  upon  me  as  chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  Ways  and  Means  have  left  little  time  to  investi- 
gate this  subject.  But  I have  carefully  gone  through  with 
the  details  of  this  bill,  and  I regret  to  say  that  I do  not  think 
it  as  perfect  as  I could  desire. 

The  original  bill  introduced  by  Mr.  Webster  in  the 
Senate,  which  has  evidently  formed  the  basis  of  this,  was 
consistent  in  its  provisions  if  not  perfect  in  its  details.  I 
have  understood  from  very  good  authority  that  that  bill  was 
the  joint  production  of  Mr.  Webster  and  Judge  Story.  But 
amendments  have  been  introduced  in  the  Senate  that  have 
greatly  marred  its  beauty  and  obscured  its  provisions.  It  is 
in  some  respects  contradictory,  and  I think  it  will  be  very 
difficult  to  carry  it  into  effect.  Nevertheless,  as  it  is  now 
conceded  on  all  hands  that  it  is  too  late  to  attempt  to  perfect 
this  great  measure  at  this  session,  the  question  presents  itself 
whether  we  will  take  the  bill  as  it  is,  postponing  its  operation 
long  enough  after  the  commencement  of  the  next  session  to 
enable  us  to  correct  any  defects  at  that  time,  or  adjourn 
without  any  legislation  upon  this  subject.  I cannot  hesitate. 
I am  for  the  bill  as  it  is,  rather  than  nothing.  I take  it  “with 
all  its  imperfections  on  its  head,”  rather  than  have  no  legis- 
lation on  the  subject.  One  great  point  is  gained  to  the 
friends  of  this  measure  by  the  passage  of  this  bill : It  at 
least  compels  legislation  on  this  subject  at  the  next  session. 
It  is  to  me  a subject  of  deep  regret  that  our  legislation  at 
this  time  cannot  be  so  perfect  as  to  give  ample  and  imme- 
diate relief  to  those  for  whose  benefit  this  bill  is  intended. 
But  as  it  cannot,  the  next  best  thing  is  to  ensure  it  hereafter. 

I know  that  this  bill  is  imperfect,  and  in  voting  for  it  I 
mean  simply  to  declare  that  I am  in  favor  of  a bankrupt  law, 
and  I hope  every  gentleman  on  this  floor  who  is  in  favor  of 
this  measure  will  vote  for  this  bill  and  trust  to  the  next 
session  to  perfect  it.  We  must  make  a beginning,  and  those 
who  are  looking  for  this  relief  have  been  tantalized  with 
anticipation  until  “hope  deferred  has  made  the  heart  sick.” 

I hope  before  the  bill  goes  into  effect  that  whatever  is 
obscure  will  be  made  clear,  for  I regard  obscurity  that  leads 


MILLARD  FILLMORE. 

From  a Daguerreotype.  Probably  About  1842. 


ON  A UNIFORM  BANKRUPT  LAW. 


193 


to  litigation  a great  evil.  I hope  also  to  see  suitable  provi- 
sions as  to  the  insolvent  laws  of  the  several  States,  and  espe- 
cially do  I hope  to  see  all  jurisdiction  taken  from  the  United 
States  courts  for  the  collection  of  debts  due  the  bankrupt. 
Such  a jurisdiction  will  prove  an  intolerable  grievance.  It 
will  overwhelm  the  country  with  costs  and  litigation.  . . . 

CALLS  FOR  EXPORT  STATISTICS. 

August  22,  1841,  Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  in  favor  of  neces- 
sary appropriations  for  certain  diplomatic  agencies.  Sep- 
tember 3d  he  offered  the  following,  which  was  adopted : 

Resolved , That  the  Secretary  of  State  be  required  to  report  to 
this  House,  as  soon  after  the  commencement  of  the  next  session  as 
practicable,  a statement  of  the  privileges  and  restrictions  of  the  com- 
mercial intercourse  of  the  United  States  with  all  foreign  nations 
similar  to  that  communicated  to  the  Senate  December  18,  1837  (Doc. 
8,  1st  sess.  26th  Cong.),  only  changing  the  denominations  of  the 
foreign  money,  weight  and  measures  into  those  of  the  United  States, 
according  to  the  custom-house  entries  of  domestic  exports,  and 
adding  columns  showing  the  average  amount  and  value  of  the  arti- 
cles exported  to  each  country  for  the  years  1838,  1839  and  1840, 
and  of  the  duties  on  the  same;  together  with  a summary  of  the 
average  aggregate  value  of  exports  to  each  country  for  those  years, 
of  articles  the  growth,  produce  or  manufacture  of  the  United  States, 
with  the  average  amount  of  duties  thereon  accruing  to  each  country. 


ON  THE  BANKRUPT  BILL 


There  was  a stormy  scene  in  the  House,  January  15, 
1842,  the  Bankrupt  Bill  being  under  discussion.  The  journal 
of  proceedings  is  a jumble  of  interrupted  speeches  and  hot 
retorts.  The  Speaker  quite  lost  control  for  the  time  being. 
When  Mr.  Cushing  appealed  from  a decision,  the  presiding 
officer  made  the  remarkable  reply,  “I  expected  it.”  Mr. 
Fillmore  gained  the  floor  and  began  to  speak.  “I  have  once 
witnessed  a scene  in  this  House,”  he  said,  “of  even  more 
violence  than  that  which  has  taken  place  this  day.  I recol- 
lect when  an  effort  was  made” — 

Here  he  was  interrupted,  his  voice  drowned  by  many 
cries.  Finally  he  managed  to  make  himself  heard  again.  “I 
refer,”  he  continued,  “to  the  odious  New  Jersey  case,  when 
an  effort  was  made  on  the  part  of  the  majority” — 

Here  he  was  again  called  to  order  and  it  was  some  time 
before  he  was  able  to  proceed.  He  finally  gained  the  consent 
and  ear  of  the  House,  saying  he  would  use  milder  language 
in  relation  to  that  precedent,  if  it  was  desired,  although  the 
country  had  long  since  pronounced  its  judgment  upon  it. 

He  desired  to  say  in  reference  to  that  case,  that  it  would 
be  recollected  by  those  who  were  members  of  this  House, 
that  a majority  ordered  a committee  to  report  forthwith; 
that  the  committee,  in  obedience  to  that  order,  presented  a 
report  at  the  bar  of  the  House,  and  asked  leave  to  present  it 
at  the  table.  Objection  was  made ; and,  notwithstanding  the 
strong  party  violence  then  pervading  this  hall,  there  was  yet 


194 


ON  THE  BANKRUPT  BILL. 


195 


found  independence  and  integrity  enough  here  to  sustain 
the  rules  of  the  House,  and  to  prevent  that  report  being 
made. 

The  report  was  retained  in  the  possession  of  the  com- 
mittee three,  four,  or  five  days,  before  the  committee  was 
called  in  its  order  to  make  a report;  and,  till  they  were  so 
called,  it  could  not  be  made.  The  last  report  which  was 
made  in  that  case,  just  before  the  adjournment,  was  also 
attempted  to  be  made  at  various  times.  It  was  suggested  at 
that  time  that  it  was  a privileged  question,  having  reference 
to  the  seats  of  the  members,  although  no  effort  was  made  to 
break  down  the  rules;  and  although  the  speaker  decided 
that  it  was  not,  yet  an  appeal  was  taken,  the  decision  over- 
ruled, and  the  report  made,  but  made  upon  the  ground  that 
it  was  a privileged  question,  and  not  upon  the  ground  that  it 
was  within  the  rules  of  the  House  to  make  it  out  of  order. 

Was  it  necessary,  he  would  ask,  in  a case  like  this,  that 
this  extraordinary  proceeding  should  be  had,  and  that  the 
rules  of  the  House  should  be  broken  to  reach  the  object? 
He  knew  that  the  Bankrupt  Bill  was  doomed  in  this  House. 
He  regretted  that  it  was  necessary  that  resort  should  be 
had  to  the  Opposition  here,  by  those  who  made  this  move- 
ment, to  accomplish  it  in  such  great  haste.  He  regretted 
that  the  House  should  suffer  its  rules  thus  to  be  broken 
down  and  trampled  upon  when  the  object  was  within  the 
rules ; and  he  called  upon  the  members  on  all  sides  of  this 
House  to  come  forward  now  and  sustain  its  rules  and  its 
character.  If  this  decision  of  the  Chair  was  to  be  sustained, 
all  that  was  wanting  when  there  was  a wish  to  break  down 
the  rules,  would  be  to  introduce  a resolution,  to  pass  it  by  a 
majority,  to  make  it  imperative  to  act  forthwith;  and  thus 
the  whole  order  of  business  would  be  changed.  Was  the 
House  prepared  for  this?  We  had  passed  through  more 
violent  scenes  without  doing  it,  and  he  called  upon  the 
House  to  pause  before  doing  it  now. 


SPEECH  ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL 


The  House  of  Representatives  being  in  Committee  of  the 
Whole  on  the  Tariff  Bill  June  9,  1842,  Mr.  Fillmore,  as 
Chairman  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  who 
reported  the  bill,  opened  the  debate  with  the  following  re- 
marks : 

Mr.  Chairman : I regret  that  the  time  allowed  the  Com- 
mittee of  Ways  and  Means  for  the  consideration  of  this  im- 
portant measure  was  so  short,  that  they  were  prevented  from 
submitting  to  the  House  a written  report  on  the  subject. 
Had  time  permitted,  I doubt  not  that  such  a report,  deliber- 
ately and  cautiously  prepared,  would  have  been  far  more 
satisfactory  to  this  House,  and  the  country,  than  any  undi- 
gested and  brief  explanation  of  mine.  The  truth  is,  the  com- 
mittee were  so  pressed  for  time  on  this  bill,  that  no  member 
of  it  had  any  which  he  could  spare  for  the  consideration  of 
the  general  subject;  but  our  whole  time  was  necessarily 
devoted  to  the  details  of  the  bill,  and  we  were  compelled  to 
sit  from  five  to  seven  hours  a day,  besides  attending  the  reg- 
ular sessions  of  this  House. 

Every  one  must  admit  that  the  question  under  considera- 
tion is  one  of  the  greatest  magnitude.  Nothing  of  a purely 
domestic  character,  affecting  more  interests,  and  calculated 
to  excite  more  universal  feeling  for  or  against  it,  could  be 
submitted  to  an  American  Congress.  It  involves  the  exer- 
cise of  the  highest  legislative  power — that  which  compels 
the  people  at  large,  who  have  established  this  Government, 
to  contribute  the  necessary  means  to  sustain  it,  and  provide 
for  the  common  welfare  and  general  defence  of  the  nation. 
Surely  nothing  short  of  the  questions  of  war  and  peace  can 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


197 


be  of  more  importance  to  this  country  than  the  mode  in 
which  we  shall  exercise  this  highly  responsible  and  delicate 
trust  of  raising  revenue  for  the  wants  of  the  Government. 
I am  free  to  confess  that  the  subject  is  so  vast  in  extent,  and 
so  complicated  and  multifarious  in  its  details,  that  I approach 
it  with  doubt  and  distrust  of  my  own  powers,  and  unfeigned 
regret  that  this  duty  has  not  been  assigned  to  more  able  and 
experienced  hands. 

I regret  that,  on  a subject  of  so  much  importance,  neither 
the  committee  nor  this  House  has  been  furnished  with  proper 
authentic  information  on  which  to  base  its  action.  Since 
the  passage  of  the  Compromise  Act,  in  March,  1833,  all  had 
known  that  this  time  there  must  be  a revision  of  our  laws 
for  the  collection  of  duties ; and  yet,  nearly  ten  years  have 
been  suffered  to  pass  away  without  one  step  being  taken, 
either  by  Congress  or  the  Executive  Departments  of  the 
Government,  to  collect  well-authenticated  facts,  on  which 
to  base  future  legislation.  All  we  have  on  the  subject  is 
the  statistical  information  collected  with  the  last  census — 
as  yet  hardly  published — and  the  reports  annually  made  to 
Congress  on  commerce  and  navigation,  showing  the  amounts 
of  imports  and  exports,  and  the  value  of  the  articles  at  the 
custom-house,  but  wholly  omitting  to  show  the  value  of  the 
articles  in  the  principal  markets  of  this  country,  or  the 
amount  produced  here:  all  of  which  is  indispensable  to 
enable  us  to  proceed  correctly  in  revising  this  complicated 
and  delicate  system. 

It  is  known  to  this  House  that,  for  the  purpose  of  supply- 
ing this  want  of  information,  a resolution  was  moved  by  my 
honorable  friend  from  Massachusetts  [Mr.  Winthrop] — I 
regret  to  say  no  longer  a member  of  this  body — for  the  ap- 
pointment of  a committee  with  authority  to  sit  during  the 
recess,  and  to  send  for  persons  and  papers,  that  they  might 
collect,  on  oath,  the  information  so  much  wanted  on  this 
subject.  All  know  the  fate  of  that  resolution,  and  the 
sources  of  opposition  to  it.  I can  only  say,  for  myself,  that 
I regret  extremely  that  it  is  not  adopted  and  the  committee 
appointed ; and  I fear  that  this  House  and  the  country  will 


198 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


also  have  cause  to  regret  it.  I care  not  from  what  quarter 
of  the  Union  they  might  have  come,  or  of  what  trade  or 
profession  the  committee  might  have  been  composed,  or 
whom  they  might  have  represented,  whether  manufacturers, 
merchants  or  agriculturists;  one  thing,  certainly,  would 
have  been  accomplished,  and  that  of  great  importance : they 
would  have  collected  and  presented  to  this  House  and  the 
country  authentic  information,  obtained  from  practical  per- 
sons, in  all  the  various  professions  and  occupations  of  life, 
showing  the  working  of  our  present  system  of  revenue  laws, 
its  defects  and  advantages ; and  on  this  we  could  have  based 
our  action  in  the  revision  of  the  tariff.  But  jealousy  of  a 
favorite  interest  here,  and  a long-cherished  theory  there, 
one  of  which  might  be  injured,  and  the  other  exploded,  by 
exposing  them  to  the  test  of  facts,  prevented  the  appoint- 
ment of  that  committee ; and,  for  the  want  of  the  informa- 
tion which  it  could  have  given,  we  are  now  compelled  to 
grope  our  way  in  the  dark,  and  substitute  conjecture  and 
theory  for  fact  and  experience. 

I do  think  we  sacrifice  more  to  favorite  theories  than  any 
other  nation  in  the  world.  From  our  course  of  proceeding, 
one  would  suppose  that  every  man  was  born  a legislator,  and 
possessed  all  the  requisite  knowledge  by  intuition.  How 
different  the  course  pursued  by  Great  Britain.  Would  it 
not  be  wise  to  imitate,  in  this  matter,  her  caution,  prudence, 
and  sagacity?  When  she  was  about  to  change  her  tariff 
laws,  an  intelligent  committee  was  appointed  by  the  House 
of  Commons,  which  called  before  it  practical  men,  interested 
on  both  sides  of  the  question,  whose  evidence  was  taken,  laid 
before  Parliament,  and  published  to  the  world.  Mr.  Hume’s 
celebrated  report  last  year  was  the  result  of  such  an  investi- 
gation. It  is  in  these  collisions  of  interest  and  intellect  that 
you  are  to  find  truth — not  in  the  fine-spun  theories  and  un- 
practiced political  economists,  or  of  mere  useless  declaimers 
for  popular  effect  upon  this  floor. 

But,  sir,  what  has  been  our  course  on  this  subject  in  this 
country?  Why,  for  all  political,  commercial,  and  financial 
evils,  some  gentlemen  on  this  floor  maintain  that  free  trade 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


199 


is  the  great  panacea.  It  is  with  them  the  philosopher’s 
stone : it  would  prevent  revulsions  in  commerce,  supply  the 
wants  of  your  Treasury,  and  promote  the  prosperity  of  the 
community.  Others  again,  from  other  parts  of  the  country, 
maintain  that  protection  to  home  manufactures  is  the  great 
desideratum,  and  the  true  remedy  for  all  these  evils.  Each 
has  his  own  peculiar  theories,  and  adheres  to  them  with  the 
blindness  of  prejudice  and  the  tenacity  of  self-interest — 
each  omitting,  if  not  unwilling,  to  investigate  the  facts  on 
which  his  own  cherished  theory  is  based ; and  the  thunders 
of  popular  commotion  produced  by  the  storm  of  nullification 
have  hardly  died  away  in  the  distance,  when  the  horizon 
gives  ominous  signs  that  another  storm  is  approaching,  and 
that  this  House  and  the  country  are  again  to  be  agitated  by 
a fierce  and  blind  contest  about  mere  abstractions,  while 
truth  is  obscured  by  the  smoke  of  the  fight,  and  lost  sight 
of  by  the  contending  parties. 

Early  in  this  session  this  subject,  after  a long  contest, 
was  committed  to  the  able  committee  of  this  House  on 
manufactures;  but  I regret  that  this  House  saw  fit,  after 
this  subject  was  referred  to  that  committee,  to  withhold 
from  it  some  important  powers  to  enable  it  to  obtain  the 
information  now  so  much  needed  by  the  House.  That  com- 
mittee was  denied  the  power  to  send  for  persons  and  papers, 
and  the  assistance  of  a clerk  to  aid  in  the  collection  of  in- 
dispensable facts.  Notwithstanding  all  these  discourage- 
ments, it  is  due  to  that  committee  to  say  that  it  went  forward 
with  diligence  and  energy,  and  collected  many  facts  useful 
to  the  House  and  the  country ; but,  nevertheless,  falling  far 
short  of  what  ought  to  have  been  supplied,  and  would  have 
been  furnished,  had  the  committee  been  appointed  at  the 
extra  session,  with  permission  to  sit  during  the  recess,  and 
power  to  send  for  the  persons  and  papers.  I speak  of  this 
subject  now  “more  in  sorrow  than  in  anger” — not  by  way 
of  complaint  or  reproach,  but  because  I feel  most  sensibly 
the  want  of  the  information  which  these  committees  might 
have  furnished;  and  I doubt  not  that  this  House,  before  it 
has  disposed  of  this  subject,  will  also  feel  the  want  of  that 


200 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


information,  and  unite  with  me  in  the  deep  regret  which  I 
have  expressed  that  it  was  not  obtained. 

I trust  I may  also  be  permitted  to  add,  by  way  of  apology 
for  any  defects  in  the  bill  before  the  House,  arising  from  a 
hasty  action  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  that, 
while  I impute  no  blame  to  any  one  for  the  delay  that  ren- 
dered this  haste  unavoidable,  it  is  nevertheless  due  to  the 
committee  to  say,  that  it  did  all  in  its  power  to  avoid  it.  It 
was  but  too  apparent,  after  this  subject  was  referred  to  the 
Committee  of  Manufactures,  that  the  House  might  expect 
some  action  from  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means;  and 
as  this  committee  had  no  time  itself  for  collecting  and  ar- 
ranging the  necessary  statistical  information,  it  had  to 
depend  upon  the  Treasury  Department  to  supply  it.  I had 
frequent  conversations  with  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
almost  from  the  commencement  of  the  session,  and  under- 
stood from  him  that  he  was  collecting  information  to  lay 
before  the  House  or  the  committee  on  this  subject.  The 
committee,  having  gone  through  with  most  of  its  laborious 
business  on  the  appropriation  bills,  and  not  having  received 
the  desired  information  from  the  Department,  did,  on  the 
26th  of  February,  direct  its  chairman  to  address  a letter  to 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  calling  on  him  for  this  infor- 
mation. This  was  accordingly  done  on  that  day;  and,  after 
waiting  until  the  29th  of  March  without  receiving  a re- 
sponse, but  instead  of  getting  a gentle  hint  from  the  Execu- 
tive that  there  was  some  neglect,  the  committee  reported  a 
resolution  to  the  House,  which  was  adopted,  calling  on  the 
Secretary  for  the  requisite  information.  Still  the  committee 
continued  to  wait  with  the  utmost  anxiety  until  the  9th  of 
May,  before  the  Secretary’s  report  came  in.  In  the  mean- 
time, the  Committee  of  Manufactures  had  reported,  and  then 
only  a little  more  than  a month  and  a half  remained  before 
final  action  must  be  had  on  the  subject,  as  it  was  thought  no 
duties  could  be  collected  after  the  1st  of  July,  without  fur- 
ther legislation.  Thus  it  will  be  perceived  that  the  commit- 
tee had  but  a few  days  (during  which  they  were  required  to 
attend  the  sessions  of  this  House  from  five  to  six  hours 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


201 


each  day)  to  review  and  revise  a measure  that  it  had  taken 
five  months,  with  all  the  facilities  and  force  of  the  Treasury 
Department,  to  prepare. 

I speak  not  this  by  way  of  complaining  of  the  Depart- 
ment. Far  from  it.  I am  satisfied  that,  in  the  present  em- 
barrassed state  of  the  Treasury,  the  head  of  that  Depart- 
ment has  done  everything  in  his  power  to  collect  and  arrange 
the  matters  on  this  subject  and  lay  them  before  this  House, 
and  that  he  could  not  accomplish  it  before;  but  I recite 
these  facts  with  a view  of  vindicating  the  Committee  of 
Ways  and  Means,  not  only  from  what  I deemed  some  unjust 
and  ungenerous  attacks  on  this  floor  for  delay  in  reporting 
this  bill,  but  for  any  defects  which  may  be  found  either  in 
its  principles  or  details.  I much  regret  that  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  did  not  communicate  to  this  House  the  infor- 
mation he  had  collected  during  the  five  months  of  the  session 
before  the  report  was  made.  Why  it  was  withheld,  I do  not 
know.  I presume  it  was  not  through  any  default  in  the  head 
of  that  Department,  but  either  because  there  was  not  time 
to  arrange  or  abstract  it,  or  because  it  was  deemed  unneces- 
sary to  communicate  the  mass  of  details  on  which  the  report 
and  bill  were  based.  I shall  neither  arraign  the  prudence 
nor  discretion  of  the  Secretary,  yet  I regret  that  the  House 
and  committee  have  not  the  benefit  of  that  information,  if 
it  could  be  of  any  use  in  guiding  them  through  this  dark 
labyrinth.  It  is,  nevertheless,  due  to  the  Department  to  say, 
that  applications  for  information  as  to  several  parts  of  the 
bill  were  promptly  and  satisfactorily  answered.  Indeed,  the 
Department  kindly  furnished  to  the  committee  the  assistance 
of  the  gentleman,  who,  it  was  understood,  had  been  chiefly 
instrumental  in  collecting  and  arranging  the  facts,  and  pre- 
paring the  bill,  under  the  supervision  and  direction  of  the 
head  of  that  Department ; and  the  committee  derived  essen- 
tial aid  from  this  gentleman.  I therefore  make  no  complaint 
of  the  Department,  and,  as  I have  often  repeated,  only  state 
these  facts  by  way  of  justification  of  the  Committee,  and  by 
way  of  apology  for  any  defects  in  the  bill,  arising  from  the 
want  of  more  accurate  information. 


202 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


Thus  much  in  self- justification,  and  by  the  way  of 
apology  for  the  manner  in  which  the  bill  has  been  presented 
for  your  consideration : not  that  I expect  or  desire  to  avert 
scrutiny,  or  because  I hope  to  escape  censure  for  any  sins  of 
omission  or  commission.  Far  from  it:  I have  stated  the  dis- 
advantages under  which  the  committee  labored,  with  a view 
to  invite  such  an  examination  as  shall  detect  errors,  and  cor- 
rect them ; and  I have  been  too  long  a member  of  this  House 
to  suppose,  for  a moment,  that,  even  if  the  bill  were  perfect, 
which  it  cannot  be,  the  committee  could  escape  censure. 
That  is  impossible.  There  will  be  an  honest  difference  of 
opinion,  and  I shall  be  happy  if  our  contests  are  limited  to 
those  differences. 

I now  proceed  to  the  consideration  of  the  bill  itself,  its 
design  and  object.  It  has  been  framed  with  a view  of  rais- 
ing revenue  to  supply  the  wants  of  the  Treasury,  and  I pro- 
pose to  consider  it  mainly  as  a revenue  measure. 

The  first  question,  therefore,  is : What  amount  of  revenue 
is  required  to  carry  on  the  Government?  For  on  this,  in 
some  measure,  must  depend  the  rate  of  duty  imposed  on 
every  article  in  this  bill.  It  is  preliminary  to  all  other  ques- 
tions, and  should  be  first  settled.  In  determining  this,  the 
opinion  of  the  financial  officer  of  the  Government  should 
have  great  weight,  and  I beg  leave  to  call  the  attention  of 
the  House  to  his  recent  report  to  this  House,  submitting  the 
project  for  this  bill.1 

From  this  it  will  be  perceived  that  the  Secretary  estimates 
the  ordinary  expenses  of  the  Government  for  each  of  the 
years  1842,  1843,  and  J844,  at  $25,356,358.95,  besides  the 
liabilities  of  the  Government  for  debts,  Treasury  notes,  etc., 
which  swell  the  amount  some  seven  or  eight  millions  more 
for  each  of  those  years,  making  the  total  required  for  the 
three  years  $98,242,953.73. 

The  debts  and  other  liabilities  mentioned  may  be  easily 
and  certainly  calculated,  as  their  amount  is  known  and  must 

1.  Mr.  Fillmore  here  submitted  a comparative  estimate  of  expenditures 
for  1842,  1843  and  1844,  under  the  various  heads  of  civil,  foreign  intercourse, 
military  and  naval,  redemption  of  Treasury  notes,  etc.,  etc.  For  the  pur- 
poses of  his  argument,  his  own  summary  will  suffice. 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


203 


be  paid ; but  not  so  with  the  ordinary  expenses  of  the  Gov- 
ernment. They  vary  from  year  to  year,  and  will  depend 
much  on  the  administration  of  affairs.  It  may  not,  however, 
be  expedient  to  recur  to  the  past  to  enable  us  to  judge  of  the 
future.  Indeed,  experience  is  the  only  true  test  in  these 
matters.  I therefore  call  the  attention  of  the  House  to  Docu- 
ment No.  31,  furnished  to  this  House  at  the  extra  session 
from  the  Treasury  Department,  and  at  page  26  of  that  docu- 
ment you  will  find  the  following  statement  of  disbursement, 
during  the  four  years  of  Mr.  Van  Buren’s  Administration, 
for  the  ordinary  expenses  of  Government,  viz. : 


In  1837 $31,610,003  09 

In  1838 31,544,396  19 

In  1839 25,443,716  94 

In  1840 22,389,356  31 


Total $110,987,472  53 

Being  an  average  per  year  of $27,746,868  13 


If  this  past  experience  affords  a guide  for  future  action, 
we  may  calculate  that  the  annual  expenses  of  the  Govern- 
ment hereafter  will  be  between  $27,000,000  and  $28,000,000 
independent  of  the  amount  necessary  to  be  raised  for  the 
public  debt  now  existing ; but  I trust  that  we  shall  hereafter 
have  more  economy  in  the  administration  of  public  affairs, 
and  that  we  shall  not  only  expend  less,  but  make  a more 
beneficial  application  of  what  we  do  expend. 

But  there  has  been  much  discussion  on  this  subject,  both 
in  this  House  and  in  the  other,  and  some  of  the  oldest  and 
ablest  statesmen  in  both  branches  have  gone  into  laborious 
and  ingenious  investigations  to  show  the  probable  expendi- 
tures hereafter.  Their  results,  varying  from  $18,000,000  to 
$26,000,000,  show  how  difficult  the  task  is,  and  how  little 
reliance  can  be  placed  on  their  estimates.  Where  so  much 
must  be  left  to  conjecture  I shall  not  attempt  to  follow  them. 

For  the  indications  which  we  have  seen  here  for  a few 
days  past,  one  might  infer  that  a spirit  of  retrenchment  had 
come  over  this  House,  and  that  the  army  and  navy  are  to  be 


204 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


greatly  reduced.  However  I may  regret  the  inconsiderate 
haste  with  which  those  acts  were  perpetrated,  which,  to  my 
mind,  savored  more  of  destruction  than  judicious  reform, 
yet  it  must  be  admitted  by  all,  if  the  Senate  concur  with  this 
House  in  those  measures,  the  annual  expenditures  of  Gov- 
ernment will  be  diminished.  Taking  all  these  things  into 
consideration,  I am  willing  to  assume  the  ordinary  expenses 
of  Government  will,  for  some  years,  if  peace  continue,  be 
reduced  some  $3,000,000  or  $4,000,000  annually ; and,  if  so, 
we  may  reasonably  calculate  that  they  will  not  exceed  about 
$24,000,000,  and  may  probably  come  as  low  as  $23,000,000 ; 
but  this  is  rather  to  be  desired  than  expected.  But  allowing 
$24,000,000,  which  I think  is  the  safest  estimate,  and  add  to 
that  $3,000,000  to  pay  the  interest  on  the  public  debt  and 
provide  a sinking  fund  for  the  ultimate  payment  of  it,  and 
you  will  require  an  annual  revenue  of  $27,000,000  to  meet 
the  demands  upon  the  Treasury.  I shall  therefore  assume 
that  the  amount  must  be  provided. 

This  being  the  amount,  the  next  question  is,  how  shall  it 
be  raised  ? In  what  mode  can  these  $27,000,000  be  supplied 
to  the  National  Treasury  with  least  inconvenience  to  the 
people  ? 

Let  us  turn  to  the  great  charter  whence  all  our  power  is 
derived,  and  see  what  that  says.  The  very  first  grant  of 
legislative  power  in  the  Constitution  is  an  authority  to  supply 
the  requisite  revenue  to  carry  on  the  Government.  The  8th 
section  of  the  1st  article  of  the  Constitution  is  in  the  follow- 
ing words : 

“The  Congress  shall  have  power  to  lay  and  collect  taxes,  duties 
imposts,  and  excises,  to  pay  the  debts  and  provide  for  the  common 
defence  and  general  welfare  of  the  United  States ; but  all  duties, 
imposts,  and  excises  shall  be  uniform  throughout  the  United  States.” 

There  is  the  grant  of  power  by  which  the  Treasury  is  to 
be  supplied.  We  can  take  our  choice  from  three  modes,  and 
three  only.  First,  we  may  lay  a direct  tax ; or,  secondly,  we 
may  lay  excises;  or,  thirdly,  we  may  lay  duties  or  imposts. 
Now,  to  which  shall  we  resort?  We  must  select  one,  as  no 
other  power  is  given,  unless  it  be  to  borrow  money;  and 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


205 


none  will  think  of  that  for  the  ordinary  wants  of  the  Gov- 
ernment. 

If  I recollect  right,  when  we  last  had  this  subject  under 
consideration,  an  honorable  gentleman  from  South  Caro- 
lina [Mr.  Rhett]  suggested  that  the  best  mode  of  supplying 
the  wants  of  the  Treasury  was  by  direct  taxation.  The  sug- 
gestion had  a very  good  circulation  in  the  country,  and,  it 
seemed  to  me,  appeared,  without  much  consideration,  to  find 
some  favor  in  this  House.  That  we  have  the  power  to 
supply  the  Treasury  by  direct  taxation  none  can  deny ; but 
is  there  any  gentleman  here  who  will  risk  his  reputation  as  a 
statesman  and  a financier  by  insisting  that  we  should  resort 
to  direct  taxes  under  any  circumstance  short  of  the  direst 
necessity?  We  have  tried  this  system  once,  nay,  twice ; and 
I hope  that  honorable  gentlemen  who  indicate  a willingness 
to  resort  to  it  again,  will  at  least  look  into  the  legislation  on 
this  subject  before  they  attempt,  for  a third  time,  a system 
that  has  heretofore  proved  so  signal  a failure. 

As  early  as  1798,  when,  I believe,  we  were  under  a little 
apprehension  of  war,  and  had  a heavy  debt  pressing  upon 
us,  and  an  inadequate  revenue,  a law  was  passed  directing 
a valuation  of  real  property  and  an  enumeration  of  slaves, 
with  a view  to  lay  a direct  tax;  and,  by  another  act,  the 
same  year,  an  annual  tax  of  $2,000,000  was  directed  to  be 
raised.  Any  gentleman  now  disposed  to  go  into  this  system 
for  raising  money  would  do  well  to  look  into  these  volumin- 
ous acts,  and  their  minute  details,  and  see  the  complicated 
machinery  which  it  is  necessary  to  put  in  motion,  and  the 
frightful  hoard  of  officers  it  spreads  through  the  country 
to  return  the  valuations  and  collect  the  tax.  Act  was  piled 
upon  act  to  supply  deficiencies,  until  1802,  when  the  law 
authorizing  the  tax  was  finally  repealed.  This  law  was  in 
force  long  enough  to  have  produced  $8,000,000,  and  yet,  up 
to  1813,  when  the  second  law  was  passed,  the  whole  amount 
realized  to  the  Treasury  was  only  $1,761,047.36,  being  about 
one  quarter  of  the  sum  which  it  directed  to  be  levied. 

During  the  last  war,  when  our  revenue  from  imposts  was 
much  diminished  by  the  interruption  of  our  commerce,  and 


206 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


our  expenses  greatly  augmented,  another  attempt  was  made 
to  raise  money  by  direct  taxation.  New  valuations  and 
assessments  were  provided  for;  and,  in  August,  1813,  an 
Act  passed  directing  $3,000,000  to  be  raised  by  direct  tax, 
which  was  apportioned  out  even  to  the  several  counties 
throughout  the  United  States.  On  the  9th  of  January,  1815, 
another  long  act  was  passed  increasing  the  amount  to 
$6,000,000  annually.  In  March,  1816,  after  the  close  of  the 
war,  this  last  Act  was  repealed,  and  the  tax  reduced  to 
$3,000,000  for  that  year.  The  whole  amount  collected  under 
these  last  acts,  up  to  1840,  was  only  $10,983,690.20  ; and  I 
believe  that  no  attempt  has  since  been  made  to  lay  a direct 
tax.  No  one  can  be  aware  of  the  tremendous  addition  that 
would  be  made  to  Executive  patronage  by  this  enormous  in- 
crease of  officers.  They  would  be  spread  over  the  land,  like 
the  frogs  of  Egypt,  until  they  would  be  found  in  every 
man’s  bedchamber. 

If  gentlemen  will  take  the  trouble  to  look  into  the  annual 
printed  account  of  receipts  and  expenditures  for  1840,  at 
page  242,  they  will  find  a tabular  statement  of  all  the  money 
received  into  the  Treasury,  from  every  source,  from  the 
commencement  of  the  Government  upon  the  present  Consti- 
tution, on  the  4th  of  March,  1789,  up  to  and  including  the 
year  1840.  The  whole  amount  received  from  all  sources, 
except  loans,  was  upwards  of  $900,000,000.  And  from 
what  sources  do  you  suppose  this  vast  amount  was  drawn? 

[Mr.  Foster,  of  Georgia,  was  understood  to  inquire  if 
the  amount  collected  by  direct  taxation  was  included  in  the 
statement  of  the  gentleman?] 

Mr.  Fillmore:  I speak  of  the  whole  amount  collected 
from  the  commencement  of  the  Government  down  to  1840, 
inclusive,  for  the  purpose  of  paying  the  debts  and  defraying 
the  necessary  expenses  of  the  Government.  During  that 
time,  there  have  been  periods  when  the  ingenuity  of  man 
was  taxed  to  its  utmost  to  devise  ways  and  means  for  sup- 
plying the  Treasury;  and  the  history  of  our  Government 
for  more  than  fifty  years  is  worthy  of  consideration  on  a 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


207 


subject  like  this.  I will  therefore  give  you  the  sources 
whence  this  immense  amount  was  received.  They  are  as 
follows : 


From  customs  or  duties $746,923,302  20 

From  excise  or  internal  revenue 22,265,242  06 

From  direct  taxes 12,744,737  56 

From  postage 1,092,227  52 

From  the  public  lands 109,314,223  69 

Dividends  and  sale  of  bank  stock  and  bonus 20,839,977  75 

Making  a grand  total  of $913,179,710  78 


[Mr.  Rhett  wanted  to  understand  if  the  gentleman,  in 
speaking  of  what  was  called  direct  taxation,  included  all 
that  had  been  collected  by  the  post-office,  or  merely  direct 
taxation  during  the  last  war.] 

Mr.  Fillmore : I have  not  taken  the  ordinary  receipts  into 
consideration,  regarding  that  as  an  independent  Department, 
supplying  its  own  means  to  defray  its  own  expenses.  I am 
not  aware  that. the  Post-Office  Department  has  generally 
been  looked  to  as  a source  of  revenue. 

It  appears,  from  the  statement  to  which  I have  referred, 
that,  for  many  years  after  1793,  that  Department  yielded  a 
small  revenue  to  the  Treasury,  and,  if  I recollect  right,  a law 
was  passed  during  the  war  increasing  the  rate  of  postage 
fifty  per  cent,  for  the  benefit  of  the  Treasury.  The  whole 
amount  received,  however,  was  comparatively  small,  being 
only  a little  over  $1,000,000,  from  the  commencement  of  the 
Government. 

You  perceive,  then,  from  this  statement,  that  the  great 
amount  of  our  revenue  from  the  commencement  of  the 
Government  has  been  derived  from  duties  on  goods  im- 
ported. Nearly  $747,000,000  of  the  whole  amount  have  come 
from  that  source.  A little  over  $22,000,000  from  excise, 
and  a little  upwards  of  $12,000,000  from  direct  taxes.  From 
the  public  lands,  over  $109,000,000,  and  from  dividends  of 
bank  stock,  etc.,  more  than  $20,000,000,  being  $8,000,000 
more  from  this  “odious  monster,”  a United  States  bank, 


208 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


than  from  all  our  direct  taxes,  and  almost  as  much  as  was 
ever  derived  from  excise  duties.  I merely  allude  to  these 
results  for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  the  experience  of 
more  than  fifty  years  would  seem  to  demonstrate  that  direct 
taxation  is  not  the  mode  by  which  revenue  can  be  raised  to 
meet  the  wants  of  the  Treasury. 

But,  it  may  be  said,  if  direct  taxes  will  not  answer,  try 
excises.  Raise  the  necessary  amount  by  excises.  Let  us 
understand  what  is  meant  by  excises.  I understand  excises 
to  be  a duty  levied  upon  our  own  products  and  manufac- 
tures ; whereas  duties  and  imposts  are  levied  upon  goods 
imported  from  foreign  countries.  One  is  a tax  upon  our 
own  labor,  the  other  upon  the  labor  of  foreigners;  and, 
though  both  may  in  part  fall  upon  the  consumer,  yet  all  of 
one  is  paid  by  our  own  citizens,  and  part  of  the  other  falls 
upon  the  foreign  producer  or  manufacturer.  I am  there- 
fore surprised  that  this  mode  of  raising  revenue  finds  advo- 
cates anywhere  in  time  of  peace,  when  the  requisite  amount 
can  be  supplied  by  imposts.  I fear,  gentlemen  have  not  well 
considered  this  subject.  Let  them  look  through  the  finan- 
cial reports  and  legislation  on  this  subject,  from  the  com- 
mencement of  the  Government  down  to  this  time,  and  then 
see  if  they  are  prepared  to  recommend  excises  in  time  of 
peace.  The  name  of  excise  has  long  been  odious  in  Great 
Britain,  a nation  that  has  long  been  inured  to  taxation  in 
every  form  that  human  ingenuity  could  devise.  The  name 
was  so  odious  that  it  has  never  been  introduced  into  the 
legislation  of  this  country.  Though  a duty  in  the  shape  of 
excise  was  early  recommended  by  Alexander  Hamilton,  and 
authorized  by  law,  yet  he  felt  the  odium  attached  to  the 
name,  and  adroitly  changed  it,  and  called  it  “Internal 
Revenue” ; and  by  this  name  have  these  duties  always  been 
known  to  this  country.  Tell  me  not  now  “there’s  something 
in  a name,”  or  that  “a  rose  by  any  other  name  would  smell 
as  sweet.”  I tell  you  the  offensive  odor  attached  to  an  un- 
popular object  is  often  changed  by  the  mere  change  of  name. 

Let  us  for  a moment  turn  our  attention  to  the  history  of 
these  excise  duties  in  the  country  whence  we  derived  them. 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


209 


What  does  one  of  Great  Britain’s  own  subjects  say?  I read 
from  McCulloch’s  “Commercial  Dictionary” ; and  first  let 
us  hear  his  definition.  He  says : 

“Excise,  the  name  given  to  the  duties  or  taxes  laid  on  such 
articles  as  are  produced  and  consumed  at  home.  Custom  duties  are 
those  laid  on  commodities  when  imported  into  or  exported  from  a 
country.” 

There  is  the  distinction  to  which  I before  alluded.  One 
consequence  of  the  imposition  of  excise  duties  is,  that  we 
shall  have  a swarm  of  officers  pervading  every  part  of  the 
country  to  examine  who  are  engaged  in  the  manufacture  of 
any  article  liable  to  excise  duty.  To  prevent  evasion  and 
fraud,  searches  must  be  made,  which  are  odious  to  our 
people.  Another  evil  is,  a complication  of  legislation,  which 
leads  to  frauds  and  endless  litigation.  If  we  impose  duties 
upon  the  manufactures  of  our  own  citizens,  we  prevent  them 
from  competing  fairly  in  the  markets  of  the  world  with 
foreign  nations.  To  avoid  this,  these  duties  must  be  re- 
funded whenever  the  goods  are  exported.  This  is  the  prac- 
tice of  Great  Britain;  and,  as  a necessary  consequence, 
there  must  be  an  examination,  at  every  port,  to  see  if  the 
goods  have  paid  excise  duties,  that  they  may  be  refunded. 
This  drawback  offers  a strong  temptation  to  defraud  the 
Treasury,  by  evading  the  payment  of  excise,  and  yet  claim- 
ing the  drawback  on  exportation.  If  these  frauds  are  com- 
mon in  Great  Britain,  where  the  population  is  dense,  and 
almost  every  man  is  under  the  eye  of  a revenue  officer,  what 
may  we  not  anticipate  here,  where  our  population  is  thinly 
scattered  over  an  immense  territory,  offering  facilities  for 
frauds  which  no  official  vigilance  could  prevent  or  detect? 

Another  difficulty  grows  out  of  these  excise  duties  in 
England,  and  that  is,  to  determine  precisely  the  amount  to 
be  repaid.  The  excise  may  be  paid  on  the  article  in  a raw 
or  unmanufactured  state.  The  drawbacks  are  to  be  re- 
funded on  the  manufactured  article,  or,  perhaps,  on  the 
article  combined  with  some  other  material.  Take,  for  in- 
stance, glass,  for  illustration.  The  law  imposes  an  excise 


210 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


duty  on  the  article  when  manufactured,  and  allows  a draw- 
back when  exported.  It  would  seem  from  the  law  that  the 
amount  of  excise  paid  upon  the  articles  manufactured  was 
about  three  cents  per  pound  less  than  the  drawbacks  paid  on 
exportation;  thereby  paying  a bounty  out  of  the  Treasury 
on  the  exportation  of  the  article. 

I will  give  you  another  instance  that  illustrates  the  same 
principle;  though  the  duty  paid  is  an  impost  instead  of  an 
excise  duty,  yet,  the  drawback  on  exportation  is  the  same, 
and  calculated  in  the  same  manner.  It  is  refined  sugar. 
Some  intelligent  gentlemen  engaged  in  refining  sugar  in  this 
country  came  before  the  committee,  and  asked  for  higher 
duties,  saying,  that  the  sugar  refiners  of  England  could 
export  the  refined  article  at  six  cents  per  pound,  while  the 
raw  material  for  each  pound  of  refined  sugar  costs  eleven 
cents.  I told  them  there  must  be  some  mistake.  No  such 
trade  could  exist  for  any  length  of  time,  as  no  man  could 
afford  to  buy  the  raw  material  for  eleven  and  sell  for  six, 
especially  when  you  added  the  labor  of  refining,  and  expense 
of  transportation.  But  there  was  an  explanation,  in  part 
growing  out  of  these  duties  and  drawbacks.  The  law  im- 
posed a certain  duty  on  the  raw  article  imported,  and  allowed 
a certain  drawback  on  the  article  exported.  A suspicion 
arose  that  the  drawback  exceeded  the  duty,  and  the  law  was 
finally  changed,  so  as  to  require  the  importer  to  give  security 
that  the  sugar  imported  should  be  exported,  and  then  he  paid 
no  duties  and  received  no  drawbacks;  in  other  words,  the 
sugar  was  refined  in  bond;  and  the  consequence  was,  that 
out  of  sixty-five  sugar  refineries  in  London,  only  four  con- 
tinued their  operations  under  this  law ; thereby  showing 
conclusively  that  the  drawbacks  exceeded  the  duty.  It  is 
true  that,  in  this  case,  there  was  another  thing  to  be  taken 
into  account.  The  refiner  had  the  benefit  of  the  residuum, 
or  molasses,  which  remained  after  the  refining  process,  on 
which  he  paid  no  duty,  and  which  brought  a high  price,  in 
consequence  of  the  high  duty  on  molasses. 

These  are  some  of  the  illustrations  of  raising  revenue  by 
excise;  but,  as  I said  when  I was  diverted  from  the  subject, 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


211 


I will  read  a brief  history  of  excise  duties  from  McCulloch. 
He  says: 

“Excise  duties  were  introduced  into  England  by  the  long  Par- 
liament in  1643 ; being  then  laid  on  the  makers  and  venders  of  ale, 
beer,  cider,  and  perry.  The  royalists  soon  after  followed  the  example 
of  the  republicans;  both  sides  declaring  that  the  excise  should  be 
continued  no  longer  than  the  termination  of  the  war.  But  it  was 
found  too  productive  a source  of  revenue  to  be  again  relinquished; 
and  when  the  nation  had  been  accustomed  to  it  for  a few  years, 
the  Parliament  declared,  in  1649,  that  the  ‘impost  of  excise  was  the 
most  easy  and  indifferent  levy  that  could  be  laid  upon  the  people.’ 
It  was  placed  on  a new  footing  at  the  Restoration;  and,  notwith- 
standing Mr.  Justice  Blackstone  says  that,  ‘from  its  first  origin  to 
the  present  time,  its  very  name  has  been  odious  to  the  people  of 
England,’  (Com.  book  i.  c.  3,)  it  has  continued  progressively  to 
gain  ground,  and  is  at  this  moment  imposed  on  a variety  of  most 
important  articles,  and  furnishes  nearly  half  the  entire  revenue  of 
the  kingdom.” 

Thus  you  have  the  history  of  excise  duties.  They  origi- 
nated with  the  long  Parliament  which  was  afterwards  dis- 
solved by  Cromwell.  Both  parties  promised  to  abolish  them 
at  the  close  of  the  war.  We  need  hardly  be  told  by  Black- 
stone  that,  from  their  origin  to  the  present  time,  their  name 
has  been  odious.  Yet  they  have  been  continued  in  Great 
Britain,  and  must  be ; for  there  every  source  of  revenue  has 
been  exhausted,  and  every  mode  of  taxation  resorted  to 
which  ingenuity  could  invent  to  raise  the  necessary  means 
for  carrying  on  an  expensive  Government,  and  paying  the 
interest  upon  their  enormous  public  debt.  And,  finally,  the 
recent  proceedings  in  Parliament  show  that  they  have  been 
compelled  to  adopt  the  war  measure,  and  tax  incomes  to 
supply  the  deficiency. 

But  I trust  the  necessities  of  such  a nation  are  not  to 
furnish  precedents  for  us.  Direct  taxes  and  excises  may  be 
necessary  and  unavoidable  in  time  of  war,  but  those  who 
would  resort  to  them  in  time  of  peace  would  do  well  to  read 
the  legislation  and  reports  on  these  subjects,  and  especially 
a report  made  by  Mr.  Randolph,  in  1802,  as  Chairman  of  the 
Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  in  which  he  states  that  the 


212  ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 

expenses  of  collection  are  more  than  one-fifth,  or  twenty  per 
cent. ; that  the  duty  is  oppressive  and  vexatious,  and  peculi- 
arly obnoxious  to  our  citizens ; that  the  nature  of  excise  is 
hostile  to  the  genius  of  a free  people,  and  its  tendency  is  to 
multiply  offices  and  increase  the  patronage  of  the  Executive ; 
and  he  finally  recommends  a total  repeal.  If  other  evidence 
was  wanted  that  excise  is  odious  to  our  people,  it  may  be 
found  in  the  insurrection  of  Pennsylvania  against  this  very 
tax.  With  all  these  facts  staring  us  in  the  face,  is  there  any 
one  here  so  bold  as  to  propose  excise  duties  on  our  own 
manufactures,  to  supply  the  necessary  means  of  carrying 
on  the  Government?  If  not,  what  remains?  Nothing  but 
the  duties  and  imposts ; and  to  lay  these  duties  is  the  obj  ect 
of  the  bill  upon  your  table.  This  being  the  only  remaining 
mode  authorized  by  the  Constitution,  I deem  it  unnecessary 
to  go  into  any  argument  to  show  that  it  is  the  best  mode. 
All  our  experience  proves  that  fact,  and  I owe  an  apology 
to  the  House  for  having  occupied  so  much  of  its  time  in 
showing  the  objections  to  direct  taxes  and  excise  duties. 

The  next  question  is,  will  this  bill,  if  it  becomes  a law, 
supply  the  wants  of  the  Treasury ? Is  it  sufficient?  Here  I 
take  the  liberty  of  stating  to  the  House  that  the  bill  is,  in 
substance,  the  project  that  came  from  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury.  Although  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means 
have  changed  many  of  its  details,  sometimes  increasing  and 
sometimes  reducing  the  rate  of  duty,  as  they  thought  most 
likely  to  increase  the  revenue;  and  although  they  have 
added  some  important  provisions  to  secure  to  the  States  their 
just  interest  in  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands,  and  to  obtain 
valuable  statistical  information  for  future  legislation  on  this 
subject;  yet  the  main  features  of  the  bill  are  as  they  came 
from  the  Secretary,  and  it  will  probably  produce  about  the 
amount  of  revenue  contemplated  by  that  project. 

What,  then,  will  this  bill  produce?  For  the  purpose  of 
estimating  the  probable  amount,  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  has  taken  the  importations  of  1840,  and  calculated 
the  amount  of  duty  prescribed  by  this  bill  on  every  article 
imported,  and  the  result  shows  a gross  amount  of  $32,603,- 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


213 


335.27,  from  which  deduct  drawbacks,  etc.,  and  expenses  of 
collection,  amounting  to  $5,160,000,  and  it  leaves  a net 
revenue,  applicable  to  the  ordinary  expenses  of  Government, 
of  $27,443,335.27. 

Here  I would  remark  that  the  Secretary  has  made  his 
estimate  of  drawbacks  in  gross.  It  would  have  been  more 
satisfactory  to  me,  and  I doubt  not  it  would  be  so  to  the 
House,  had  he  given  the  amount  of  exports  of  each  article 
on  which  drawbacks  were  allowed:  not  that  it  is  necessary 
to  show  the  amount  of  revenue,  for  the  gross  amount  of 
drawbacks  deducted  show  that ; but  it  is  important  to  show 
whether  any  article  was  imported  for  consumption,  or  was 
again  exported  for  drawback.  I doubt  not  the  House  is 
aware  of  the  rule  that  allows  goods  imported  beyond  a cer- 
tain amount  to  be  exported ; and,  when  exported,  the  amount 
of  import  duty  which  they  paid  is  refunded  in  drawbacks. 
Hence  it  is  not  only  necessary  to  know  the  amount  imported, 
but  the  amount  exported,  of  any  article,  to  know  whether 
the  duty  is  too  high  to  permit  it  to  be  imported  for  consump- 
tion ; and  hence,  also,  an  estimate  of  duties  based  upon  our 
imports,  without  taking  into  consideration  our  exports  of 
the  same  articles,  forms  no  guide  for  ascertaining  the 
amount  of  revenue.  Thus  we  may,  for  any  given  year,  have 
importations  that  show  an  apparent  amount  of  revenue  equal 
to  $50,000,000,  and  yet,  when  we  come  to  deduct  the  expor- 
tations and  consequent  drawbacks,  it  may  be  reduced  to 
$30,000,000. 

Although  the  Secretary  has  estimated  that  this  bill  will 
raise  $27,000,000  and  upwards,  yet  I am  satisfied,  on  a close 
examination,  that  it  cannot  be  relied  on  to  produce  that 
amount.  In  the  first  place,  I am  prepared  to  concede  that 
the  Secretary  has  selected  a year  when  the  importations 
were  below  the  average  for  the  last  seven  years.  His  esti- 
mates are  based  upon  the  importations  of  the  year  1840, 
which  were,  in  round  numbers,  only  $107,000,000,  while  the 
average  importations  for  seven  years,  from  1834  to  1840 
inclusive,  were  $141,000,000;  and  yet,  notwithstanding  the 
great  disparity  between  the  year  1840  and  the  average  of 


214 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


those  seven  years,  I am  satisfied  that  the  Secretary’s  bill 
cannot  be  relied  on  to  produce  the  requisite  amount  of 
revenue  for  each  year.  For  a succession  of  years  it  may,  and 
doubtless  will,  produce  the  amount  which  he  estimates. 

One  reason  why  the  average  of  the  seven  years  is  so 
great,  and  so  much  above  that  of  1840,  is  in  consequence  of 
the  excessive  importations  of  1836  and  1839,  they  being, 
in  those  years,  nearly  double  what  they  were  under  ordinary 
circumstances. 

[Mr.  Fillmore  here  introduced  tables  showing  imports  by 
years  from  1834  to  1840  inclusive,  with  value  of  portion 
admitted  free,  value  of  portion  on  which  duties  were  paid, 
total  values,  and  average  value  for  each  year  of  the  period 
named.  The  aggregate  value  of  imports  for  the  seven  years 
was  $990,337,381,  the  valuation  of  goods  on  which  duty  was 
paid  being  but  $488,239,195.] 

It  is  unnecessary  to  advert  to  the  causes  of  these  ex- 
cessive importations.  They  vary  much  from  year  to  year, 
and  doubtless  that  in  1836  was  caused  in  part  by  the  great 
fire  in  New  York,  that  destroyed  immense  quantities  of 
goods,  causing  a deficiency  that  had  to  be  supplied  by  fresh 
importations.  But  another  cause  of  excessive  importations 
during  all  these  years  is,  that  more  than  half  came  in  free 
of  duty.  It  cannot  be  supposed  that  the  importations  will  be 
so  great  when  goods  are  subjected  to  duty.  It  should  also 
be  borne  in  mind  that,  during  most  of  the  time,  the  currency 
was  greatly  inflated,  prices  were  high,  offering  a strong  in- 
ducement to  import,  and  leaving  a heavy  debt  due  abroad, 
that  must  be  met  by  our  exportation  before  our  importa- 
tions can  again  equal  these  amounts.  All  these  things  should 
be  taken  into  the  account  in  estimating  the  amount  of  rev- 
enue which  this  bill  will  produce. 

I therefore  conclude,  that  although  the  Secretary  has 
taken  a year,  below  the  average  of  the  seven  years,  yet  even 
that  has  furnished  a higher  amount  of  importations  than  we 
can  rely  upon  annually,  for  the  reasons  which  I have  men- 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


215 


tioned.  I believe  all  will  concede  that,  for  the  present,  and 
probably  the  next  year,  there  must  necessarily  be  a great 
depression  in  trade,  and  that  our  importations  must  unavoid- 
ably fall  off.  Hard  times  have  made  people  economical — 
luxuries  have  been  retrenched  and  necessaries  supplied  with 
provident  care — and  it  must  be  some  time  before  we  can 
expect  or  desire  such  excessive  importations  as  we  have  had 
for  several  years  past. 

But  for  a series  of  years  I think  we  may  rely  upon  this 
bill  producing,  on  an  average,  about  $27,000,000  annually. 
Yet,  after  all,  any  person  who  will  look  over  the  past  years, 
and  see  how  the  revenue  from  customs  varies,  must  be 
satisfied  that  we  cannot  calculate  with  any  certainty  for  any 
particular  year.  All  we  can  rely  upon  is  a general  result 
for  a series  of  years.  The  deficiency  of  one  is  supplied  by 
the  excess  of  another,  and  so  vice  versa,  each  compensating 
the  other.  The  amount  has  varied,  within  a few  years  past, 
from  $13,000,000  to  $24,000,000.  Assuming,  then,  that  this 
bill  will  only  produce  from  $25,000,000  to  $27,000,000,  it 
seems  to  me  there  is  an  end  of  the  question,  unless  some 
gentleman  can  show  that  the  duty  on  any  particular  item 
should  be  increased  or  diminished  with  a view  of  adding  to 
the  amount  of  revenue.  It  is  unnecessary  to  talk  about  levy- 
ing duties  for  protection.  If  it  is  not  expedient  to  resort  to 
direct  taxation  or  excises  to  supply  the  Treasury,  then  we 
have  no  alternative  but  impost  duties,  such  as  this  bill  pro- 
poses to  lay,  and  protection  to  a reasonable  extent  becomes 
an  accident  which  need  not  be  sought,  for  it  cannot  be 
avoided.  It  results  as  an  inevitable  consequence  from  a 
necessary  and  unavoidable  act,  and  the  bill  becomes,  as  it 
was  designed  to  be,  a revenue  bill,  and  a revenue  bill  only. 

Although  this  is  the  view  which  I am  disposed  to  take  of 
this  bill,  and  although  I am  willing  to  listen  to  any  amend- 
ments to  add  to  or  diminish  the  duty  on  any  article,  with  a 
view  of  increasing  the  revenue,  yet  I have  no  disguise  of  my 
own  sentiments  on  the  subject  of  protecting  our  own  indus- 
try. I am  free  to  admit  that  I am  not  one  of  those  who 
either  feel  or  profess  to  feel  indifferent  to  our  own  inter- 


216 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


ests.  I prefer  my  own  country  to  all  others,  and  my  opinion 
is  that  we  must  take  care  of  ourselves ; and  while  I would 
not  embarrass  trade  between  this  and  any  foreign  country 
by  any  illiberal  restrictions,  yet  if,  by  legislation  or  negotia- 
tion, an  advantage  is  to  be  given  to  one  over  the  other,  I 
prefer  my  own  country  to  all  the  world  besides.  I admit 
that  duties  may  be  so  levied,  ostensibly  for  revenue,  yet  de- 
signedly for  protection,  as  to  amount  to  prohibition,  and 
consequently  to  the  total  loss  of  revenue.  I am  for  no  such 
protection  as  that.  I have  no  disguise  of  my  opinions  on 
this  subject.  I believe  that  if  all  the  restrictive  systems 
were  done  away  with,  here  and  in  every  other  country,  and 
we  could  confidently  rely  on  continued  peace,  that  would  be 
the  most  prosperous  and  happy  state.  The  people  of  every 
country  would  then  produce  that  which  their  habits,  skill, 
climate,  soil,  or  situation  enabled  them  to  produce  to  the 
greatest  advantage;  each  would  then  sell  where  he  could 
obtain  the  most,  and  buy  where  he  could  purchase  cheapest ; 
and  thus  we  should  see  a trade  as  free  among  the  nations 
of  the  world  as  we  now  witness  among  the  several  states  of 
this  Union.  But  however  beautiful  this  may  be  in  theory, 
I look  for  no  such  political  millenium  as  this.  Wars  will 
occur  until  man  changes  his  nature ; and  duties  will  be  im- 
posed upon  our  products  in  other  countries  until  man  shall 
cease  to  be  selfish,  or  kings  can  find  a more  convenient  mode 
of  raising  revenue  than  by  imposts. 

These,  then,  form  the  true  justification  for  laying  duties 
in  a way  to  protect  our  own  industry  against  that  of  foreign 
nations:  First,  a reasonable  apprehension  of  war,  for  no 
nation  can  always  hope  for  peace.  If,  therefore,  there  is 
any  article  that  is  indispensably  necessary  for  the  subsistence 
of  a nation,  and  the  nation  can  produce  it,  that  nation  is  not 
independent  if  it  do  not.  If  it  is  necessary,  the  production 
should  not  be  encouraged  by  high  duties  on  the  imported 
article.  This  should  be  done,  not  for  the  benefit  of  persons 
who  may  engage  in  the  manufacture  or  cultivation  of  the 
desired  article,  but  for  the  benefit  of  the  whole  community : 
what  though  each  pays  a little  higher  for  the  article  in  time 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


217 


of  peace  than  he  otherwise  would,  yet  he  is  fully  compen- 
sated for  this  in  time  of  war.  He  then  has  this  necessary, 
of  which  he  would  be  wholly  deprived  had  he  not  provided 
for  it  by  a little  self-sacrifice.  We  all  act  upon  this  principle 
individually;  and  why  should  we  not,  as  a nation?  We  ac- 
cumulate in  time  of  plenty  for  a day  of  famine  and  distress. 
Every  man  pays,  from  year  to  year,  a small  sum  to  insure 
his  house  against  fire,  submitting  willingly  to  this  annual 
tax,  that,  when  the  day  of  misfortune  comes,  if  come  it  shall, 
the  overwhelming  calamity  of  having  all  destroyed  may  be 
mitigated  by  receiving  back  from  the  insurer  a partial  com- 
pensation for  the  loss.  It  is  upon  the  same  principle  that  we 
maintain  an  army  and  a navy  in  time  of  peace,  and  pour  out 
millions  annually  for  their  support:  not  because  we  want 
them  then,  but  because  it  is  reasonable  to  apprehend  that 
war  may  come,  and  then  they  will  be  wanted;  and  it  is  a 
matter  of  economy  to  provide  and  discipline  them  in  time  of 
peace,  to  mitigate  the  evils  of  war  when  it  does  come.  The 
same  reason  requires  us  to  encourage  the  production  of  any 
indispensable  article  of  subsistence.  I shall  not  now  stop 
to  inquire  what  these  articles  are.  Every  one  can  judge 
for  himself.  But  that  there  are  many  such  no  one  can 
doubt. 

But,  secondly,  there  is  yet  another  case  where  I hold  that 
we  are  not  only  justified  but  required  to  encourage  and  pro- 
tect our  own  industry ; and  I regret  to  say  that  this  is  a case 
which,  for  obvious  reasons,  always  has  [existed]  and  I fear 
always  will,  exist : it  is  where  foreign  nations,  by  their 
own  legislation,  exclude  our  products  from  their  markets. 
We  are  an  agricultural  nation,  occupying  one  of  the  broad- 
est and  most  fertile  tracts  of  country  in  the  world.  The 
South  produces  sugar,  cotton,  rice,  and  tobacco,  and  the 
North  and  West  produce  beef,  pork  and  bread-stuffs.  It 
appears,  by  the  last  census  that  we  have  3,717,756  persons 
engaged  in  agriculture,  and  only  791,545  in  manufactures 
and  trades,  being  near  five  to  one  employed  in  agriculture. 
Our  lands  are  cheap  and  our  soils  productive;  but  if  other 
nations  prohibit  the  introduction  of  our  agricultural  products 


218 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


to  their  markets  by  high  duties,  what  is  our  remedy?  We 
want  their  manufactures;  we  offer  them  our  bread-stuffs 
in  exchange;  but  they  refuse  to  receive  them:  what  shall 
we  do?  I say,  meet  restriction  by  restriction.  Impose  duties 
on  their  manufactures,  and  thereby  encourage  a portion  of 
our  own  people,  now  raising  wheat  and  corn  to  rot  in  their 
granaries,  to  engage  in  manufactures:  thus  lessening  the 
amount  of  agricultural  products,  by  converting  a part  of 
your  producers  into  consumers,  thereby  creating  a home 
market  for  your  agricultural  products,  and  thus  raising  their 
price.  Is  not  this  just?  Great  Britain  has  no  right  to  com- 
plain that  we  meet  restriction  by  restriction.  We  offer  her 
our  flour,  pork,  and  beef  for  her  iron,  cloths,  and  other 
manufactures.  She  refuses  our  products,  and  draws  upon 
our  specie,  crippling  our  banks,  deranging  our  currency,  and 
paralyzing  our  industry.  We  must  protect  ourselves,  create 
and  preserve  a market  for  our  own  products,  until  she  will 
consent  to  meet  us  on  equal  terms ; and  this,  not  by  way  of 
retaliation,  but  in  self-defence. 

But  it  may  be  said  that  this  protection  is  given  for  the 
purpose  of  benefiting  those  engaged  in  manufactures.  I am 
wholly  opposed  to  legislating  for  one  part  of  the  community 
at  the  expense  of  another.  All  are  equally  entitled  to  our 
protection ; and,  if  duties  are  so  levied  as  to  protect  any  par- 
ticular manufacture,  it  must  be  because  the  nation  has  an 
interest  in  encouraging  it,  and  not  for  the  benefit  of  those 
engaged  in  it.  It  is  all  idle  to  think  of  benefiting  any  par- 
ticular class  by  protection.  This  can  only  be  done  by  giving 
a monopoly  to  a few  individuals.  No  monopoly  can  be 
created  by  laying  duties.  If  the  duties  raise  the  price  so 
high  as  to  tempt  the  persons  to  engage  in  the  manufacture, 
every  one  is  at  liberty  to  do  so,  and  the  consequence  usually 
is,  that  so  many  engage  that  they  soon  compete  with  each 
other,  and,  instead  of  its  being  profitable  to  themselves,  they 
cheapen  the  article  to  the  consumer,  while  the  manufacturer 
makes  little  or  nothing.  I say,  therefore,  again,  that  it  is  all 
idle  to  talk  of  protection  for  the  benefit  of  particular  classes. 
It  should  never  be  given  but  for  the  benefit  of  the  com- 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


219 


munity;  and,  if  designed  for  any  other  object,  an  overruling 
law  of  trade,  as  I have  shown,  will  inevitably  defeat  that 
design. 

But  I take  a distinction  between  the  encouragement  and 
protection  of  manufactures.  It  is  one  thing  for  the  Govern- 
ment to  encourage  its  citizens  to  abandon  their  ordinary  pur- 
suits and  engage  in  a particular  branch  of  industry,  and  a 
very  different  thing  whether  the  Government  is  bound  to 
protect  that  industry  by  laws  similar  to  those  by  which  it 
encouraged  its  citizens  to  embark  in  it.  In  the  first  case, 
there  is  no  obligation  on  the  part  of  the  Government.  Its 
act  is  entirely  voluntary  and  spontaneous.  It  may  or  it  may 
not  encourage  the  production  or  manufacture  of  a particular 
article,  as  it  shall  judge  best  for  the  whole  community.  Be- 
fore attempting  it  the  Government  should  weigh  well  the 
advantages  and  disadvantages  which  are  likely  to  result  to 
the  whole,  and  not  to  the  particular  class  which  may  be 
tempted  to  engage.  If  a particular  branch  of  industry  is  so 
important  in  its  bearings  upon  the  public  wants,  on  account 
of  its  providing  in  time  of  peace  for  some  necessary  article 
in  time  of  war,  then,  as  the  strongest  advocates  of  free  trade 
themselves  admit,  the  Government  may  and  should  legislate 
with  a view  to  encourage  its  establishment;  and  so,  like- 
wise, if  it  be  necessary  to  provide  a home  market  for  our 
products  in  consequence  of  the  prohibitory  duties  levied 
upon  them  by  foreign  countries.  But  all  these  are  questions 
to  be  decided  according  to  the  circumstances  of  each  par- 
ticular case;  and,  as  I said,  the  decision  should  be  made 
with  a view  to  the  benefit  of  all  and  not  of  a few,  or  of  any 
particular  class  or  section  of  the  country.  But  when  the 
Government  has  decided  that  it  is  best  to  give  the  encourage- 
ment, and  the  citizen  has  been  induced  by  our  legislation  to 
abandon  his  former  pursuits,  and  to  invest  his  capital  and 
apply  his  skill  and  labor  to  the  production  of  the  article  thus 
encouraged  by  Government,  then  a new  question  arises,  for 
another  party  has  become  interested,  and  that  is,  whether 
we  will  by  our  subsequent  legislation  withdraw  our  protec- 
tion from  the  citizen  whom  we  have  thus  encouraged  to  em- 


220 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


bark  his  all  in  a particular  branch  of  business  for  the  good 
of  the  public,  and  overwhelm  him  with  ruin  by  our  unsteady, 
not  to  say  perfidious,  legislation.  I can  consent  to  no  such 
thing.  It  seems  to  me  to  be  manifestly  unjust.  Our  act  in 
the  first  instance  is  free  and  voluntary.  We  may  give  the 
encouragement  or  not ; but,  having  given  it,  the  public  faith 
is  to  a certain  extent  pledged : those  who  have  accepted  our 
invitation,  and  embarked  in  these  new  pursuits,  have  done  so 
under  the  implied  promise  on  our  part  that  the  encourage- 
ment thus  given  should  not  be  treacherously  withdrawn,  and 
that  we  would  not  tear  down  what  we  had  encouraged  them 
to  build  up.  This  I conceive  to  be  a just,  clear  and  broad 
distinction  between  encouragement  before-hand  and  pro- 
tection afterwards.  The  former  is  voluntary,  depending 
wholly  upon  considerations  of  public  policy  and  expediency ; 
the  latter  is  a matter  of  good  faith  to  those  who  have  trusted 
to  the  national  honor. 

These  are  my  views  on  the  subject  of  encouraging  and 
protecting  home  industry  by  legislation ; not  that  I deem 
them  of  any  importance  to  the  bill  under  consideration,  for  I 
regard  this  as  a revenue  bill  and  to  be  passed  and  justified 
on  that  ground.  I do  not  deny  that  the  effect  will  be  to  en- 
courage and  protect  home  manufactures,  and  thereby  create 
a home  market  for  our  agricultural  products,  and  others  as 
well  as  myself  may  vote  for  it  the  more  willingly  on  this 
account ; yet  all  this  is  a mere  incident  of  raising  revenue  by 
imposing  duties  on  goods  imported.  It  depends  not  on 
design  or  intent : it  results  as  a necessary  and  inevitable  con- 
sequence. We  cannot  avoid  it  if  we  would.  If  we  impose  a 
duty  of  one  dollar  on  every  yard  of  cloth  imported,  the  duty 
is  laid,  not  to  increase  the  value  of  the  cloth,  and  thereby 
protect  the  home  manufacturer,  but  to  supply  the  wants  of 
the  Treasury ; yet,  as  a consequence,  it  encourages  and  pro- 
tects the  home  manufacturer,  and  we  cannot  avoid  it.  No 
human  foresight  can  prevent  it ; no  ingenuity  can  avoid  it ; 
and,  indeed,  no  design  can  aid  it.  Intention  has  nothing  to 
do  with  the  matter. 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


221 


Whether  we  discriminate  for  the  protection  of  home 
industry  or  not,  it  must  be  apparent  to  all  that  some  dis- 
crimination is  necessary,  even  for  the  purposes  of  revenue. 
I am,  therefore,  surprised  to  see  the  amendment  of  my 
friend  from  Georgia  [Mr.  Habersham],  which  proposes  a 
horizontal  duty  upon  all  articles  imported  of  about  twenty- 
five  per  cent,  ad  valorem.  This  not  only  disregards  all  the 
interests  of  our  own  country,  but  seems  to  set  at  defiance  the 
immutable  laws  of  trade.  It  seems  to  contemplate  that  you 
can  collect  as  high  a duty  upon  diamonds,  or  a gold  watch, 
as  you  can  upon  a cargo  of  iron  or  mahogany.  But  a mo- 
ment’s reflection  must  satisfy  any  one  that  it  is  impossible 
to  collect  a high  duty  on  articles  of  great  value  and  small 
bulk.  Take,  for  example,  a watch,  or  the  minuter  parts  of 
watch  machinery.  They  are  so  easily  concealed  about  the 
person,  in  a way  that  you  cannot  discover  them  without  an 
indecent  search,  that  when  the  duty  is  high  it  offers  so  strong 
a temptation,  with  so  slight  a chance  for  detection,  that  they 
will  be  smuggled,  and  you  get  no  revenue  at  all.  Hence,  on 
small  articles  of  great  value,  the  experience  of  all  nations 
has  concurred  in  imposing  a light  duty  to  take  away  the 
temptation  to  smuggle.  Great  Britain  imposes  no  duty,  and 
France  but  a nominal  one,  on  diamonds ; and  yet  both  these 
nations  lay  high  duties  where  they  can,  both  for  protection 
and  revenue.  The  same  observation  is  applicable  to  jewelry 
and  laces,  and  many  other  articles  of  luxury.  I regret  that 
it  is  so.  Great  injustice  grows  out  of  it.  I should  like  a 
heavy  duty  on  these  articles  of  luxury,  for  those  who  use 
them  are  able  to  pay.  But  we  are  overruled  by  a law  above 
all  human  legislation,  and  we  are  compelled  to  submit.  A 
high  duty  but  aggravates  the  evil.  It  drives  the  honest 
importer  out  of  business.  He  cannot  compete  with  the 
lawless  smuggler.  No  revenue  is  collected.  Whatever  is 
paid  by  the  consumer  goes  into  the  pockets  of  the  smuggler, 
and  thus  you  tax  the  community  to  reward  crime  and  en- 
courage a violation  of  law. 

There  is  a further  necessity  for  discrimination ; and  this, 
I suppose,  will  be  strongly  urged  by  the  anti-protection  men. 


222 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


It  arises  from  the  fact  that  the  article  on  which  you  impose 
the  duty  can  be  produced  as  cheaply,  or  nearly  as  cheaply, 
in  this  country  as  in  any  other.  In  such  cases  a small  duty 
becomes  prohibitory.  Take  for  instance  raw  cotton  or  flour. 
We  produce  more  of  these  articles  than  we  consume.  They 
can  hardly  be  imported  without  duty,  and  a very  small  duty 
is  entirely  prohibitory ; and  when  we  become  a manufactur- 
ing nation  it  will  be  so  with  regard  to  all  our  manufactures. 
Great  Britain  has  reached  this  point ; and  hence  we  witness 
the  strange  phenomenon  of  Sir  Robert  Peel,  as  the  leader  of 
the  British  House  of  Commons,  declaring  himself  in  favor 
of  free  trade,  and  against  the  imposition  of  any  duty  on 
manufactures  over  twenty  per  cent.  And  why  is  this? 
Simply  because  Great  Britain  manufactures  more  than  she 
wants  for  her  own  consumption.  Any  duty,  however  high, 
is  merely  nominal,  as  nothing  can  be  imported ; and  no  duty 
affords  any  protection  in  the  foreign  market,  where  she  has 
to  meet  and  compete  with  all  the  world.  The  truth  is,  she 
has  practiced  the  protective  system  so  long  that  her  home 
market  is  supplied  by  her  own  manufactures,  and  now,  for- 
sooth, she  pretends  to  great  merit  in  reducing  duties  which 
she  can  no  longer  collect.  But  mark  the  caution  with  which 
Sir  Robert  Peel  speaks  of  the  duty  on  sugar.  He  declines 
explaining  why  he  does  not  recommend  a reduction  of  duty 
on  that  article.  Is  not  the  reason  obvious  enough?  The 
climate  of  England  is  too  cold  to  produce  that  article.  No 
duty,  however  high,  can  operate  as  a prohibition  so  long  as 
people  will  use  it ; and  it  may  therefore  be  taxed  to  almost 
any  extent  for  revenue.  This,  doubtless,  is  the  true  reason 
why  the  duty  is  not  reduced.  Mr.  Hume,  in  his  celebrated 
report  on  the  British  tariff,  made  last  year,  states  a curious 
fact  on  this  subject,  which,  as  it  goes  to  confirm  the  truth  of 
my  argument,  I beg  leave  to  bring  to  the  notice  of  the 
House.  He  says  the  whole  amount  of  revenue  received 
from  customs  in  1840,  was  £22, 962,610,  and  that  more 
than  one-half  of  this  was  derived  from  three  articles, 
neither  of  which  was  or  could  be  produced  in  England, 
namely, 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


223 


Sugar  and  molasses 


£ 4,826,917 


Tea  . . . 
Tobacco 


3,658,763 

3,495,686 


£11,981,366 


being  more  than  500,000  pounds  sterling  over  half  of  the 
entire  revenue,  from  duties  on  imports.  Could  these  be 
produced  at  home,  does  any  one  suppose  they  would  not  be 
when  subjected  to  a duty  that  increases  their  price — as  is 
the  case  of  tobacco — to  ten  times  their  original  cost?  Cer- 
tainly they  would!  It  is  only  because  the  Ministry  know 
that  these  articles  cannot  be  produced  at  any  premium,  and 
that  a vitiated  taste  of  luxury  will  have  them  at  any  price, 
that  they  continue  to  tax  them  so  enormously.  Thus  you 
perceive  that  there  must  be  a discrimination  even  for  revenue 
between  those  articles  which  we  cannot  produce  and  those 
which  we  can.  One  will  bear  any  duty  that  does  not  raise 
its  price  too  high  for  consumption,  or  tempt  to  smuggling. 
The  other  will  not  bear  a duty  so  high  as  to  raise  the  price 
much  above  what  it  will  cost  to  produce  it  in  this  country ; 
for,  in  that  case,  it  will  be  produced  here,  and  importation 
and  revenue  must  cease.  The  true  theoretical  point  at  which 
duties  should  be  laid  on  articles  imported  which  we  can  pro- 
duce is,  to  raise  the  price  of  the  foreign  article  just  to  the 
point  at  which  it  can  be  manufactured  in  this  country,  that 
both  may  compete  together  in  our  markets.  If  it  were  pos- 
sible in  practice  to  reach  this  point,  our  importations  and 
manufactures  would  then  cease  to  fluctuate;  we  should 
obtain  the  greatest  amount  of  revenue  for  the  Treasury ; 
and  the  competition  would  reduce  the  article  to  the  lowest 
price  to  the  consumer.  I admit  the  difficulty  of  doing  this  in 
practice,  not  only  for  want  of  accurate  information,  but 
because  the  value  is  constantly  changing;  nevertheless,  I 
conceive  the  doctrine  theoretically  correct,  that  such  a point 
must  exist,  and  our  efforts  should  be  to  approximate  as  near 
it  as  possible.  I therefore  conclude  that  no  duty  in  this  bill 
is  too  high,  unless  it  amounts  to  prohibition,  or  will  induce 


224 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


smuggling,  or  is  unnecessary  to  raise  the  amount  of  revenue 
required  to  supply  the  wants  of  the  Treasury.  If  it  can  be 
shown  that  there  are  any  such  duties,  as  I doubt  not  there 
may  be  some,  then  I shall  cheerfully  go  for  reducing  them 
to  the  true  standard  which  I have  indicated. 

[Mr.  Roosevelt  here  inquired  whether  there  was  no  duty 
in  this  bill  so  high  as  comparatively  to  diminish  the  amount 
of  revenue,  so  that  lowering  the  duty  would  augment  the 
result?] 

Mr.  Fillmore:  It  is  possible  that  there  may  be;  but  if 
there  be  I am  not  aware  of  it.  As  I said  before,  the  com- 
mittee has  acted  upon  imperfect  information — in  some  cases 
far  from  being  satisfactory;  and,  therefore,  I can  only 
repeat  that  if  there  be  any  such  case,  point  it  out,  produce 
the  proof,  and  I am  ready  to  vote  to  reduce.  But  let  me  not 
be  misunderstood.  While  I am  willing  to  reduce  to  increase 
revenue,  I am  unwilling  to  so  reduce  any  duty  as  to  glut  the 
market  with  the  foreign  product  and  break  down  our  own 
manufactures,  and  thus  compel  our  citizens  to  purchase  all 
from  abroad  at  any  price  the  foreigner  may  see  fit  to  de- 
mand. I am  opposed  to  this,  but  I am  for  graduating  the 
duty  so  as  to  keep  up  competition  and  keep  down  prices. 
This  I conceive  to  be  the  only  true  course  for  supplying  the 
National  Treasury,  and  protecting  those  who  buy  as  well 
as  those  who  produce. 

As  an  additional  evidence  that  this  bill  should  be  consid- 
ered only  as  a revenue  measure,  I beg  leave  to  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  House  to  a few  statistical  results.  They  are  re- 
sults merely,  as  I shall  not  detain  or  weary  the  House  by 
going  into  details.  They  are  unnecessary  for  the  purposes 
of  my  argument.  Permit  me  to  call  your  attention  to  the 
amount  of  revenue  realized  under  the  act  of  1832,  as  modi- 
fied by  the  act  of  March  2,  1833,  usually  called  “the  com- 
promise act.”  This  last  act,  it  will  be  recollected,  required 
one-tenth  of  all  duties  over  20  per  cent,  to  be  deducted  on  the 
1st  of  January,  1834;  one-tenth  more  on  the  1st  of  January, 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


225 


1836;  one-tenth  more  on  the  1st  of  January,  1838;  one- 
tenth  more  on  the  1st  of  January,  1840;  three-tenths  more 
on  the  1st  of  January,  1842;  and  three-tenths  more  on  the 
1st  of  July,  1842. 

The  first  reduction,  therefore,  took  place  on  the  1st  of 
January,  1834;  and  if  any  one  will  look  at  the  amount  re- 
ceived from  customs  since  that  time,  he  will  find  that  in  no 
case,  save  in  a single  year,  has  the  revenue  received  from 
that  source  equalled  the  expenditures  of  the  Government. 
One  year  (1835)  when  the  receipts  were  large  and  the  ex- 
penditures unusually  small,  this  was  not  the  case;  but  in 
each  of  the  other  years  the  amount  received  from  customs 
was  not  enough  to  carry  on  the  Government.  The  receipts 
and  expenditures  in  round  numbers,  rejecting  all  below 
thousands,  were  as  follows : 

[Mr.  Fillmore  here  introduced  statistics  showing  the 
receipts  from  customs  year  by  year,  1834  to  1840  inclusive, 
the  total  being  $122,979,000.  The  offsetting  expenditures 
for  the  same  period  were  $176,067,000,  leaving  a deficit  for 
the  seven  years  of  $53,088,000,  an  average  per  year  of 
$7,584,000.] 

Here,  then,  is  the  result  of  our  wise  legislation  in  reduc- 
ing the  duties  on  imports.  The  receipts  in  1837  were  a little 
more  than  one-third  of  the  expenditures,  and  in  1840  not 
two-thirds.  During  the  seven  years  of  reduction,  when  only 
four-tenths  were  taken  off  in  all,  our  whole  receipts  from 
customs  were  only  $122,979,000  while  our  expenditures  were 
$176,067,000,  leaving  a deficit  from  this  source  of  $53,- 
088,000,  averaging  $7,584,000  annually.  As  we  shall  now 
have  no  other  revenue  than  that  derived  from  customs — 
unless,  indeed,  we  repeal  the  land  distribution  act,  which  I 
trust  we  shall  not,  but  consider  that  question  as  settled  for- 
ever for  the  benefit  of  the  States — I think  our  great  diffi- 
culty will  be  in  so  adjusting  the  several  rates  of  duty  as  to 
get  the  requisite  amount  of  revenue. 


226 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


It  is  known  to  the  House  that  there  are  two  modes  of 
imposing  duties — one  ad  valorem,  the  other  specific;  one 
looking  to  value,  the  other  to  quantity  merely.  I am  aware 
that  there  is  a feeling,  which  has  pervaded  the  community 
ever  since  the  Compromise  Act,  in  favor  of  ad  valorem 
duties,  as  the  preferable  form  of  the  two.  Now,  I do  not 
know,  and  cannot  pretend  to  say,  how  far  prejudice  or  mis- 
conception may  operate  in  this  matter.  Probably  a little 
further  examination  of  the  subject  would  change  opinions 
hastily  taken  up.  I concede  that,  in  theory,  which  often 
holds  out  to  us  a false  light, 

“That  leads  to  bewilder,  and  dazzles  to  blind/* 

the  ad  valorem  mode  may  seem  the  best,  because  it  may  be 
argued  that,  in  this  mode,  the  duty  is  in  proportion  to  the 
actual  value  of  the  thing  taxed,  which  is  the  most  conform- 
able to  justice.  In  theory  it  seems  very  plausible.  But  by 
experience,  which,  after  all,  is  the  best  teacher,  it  is  found 
that  this  apparently  just  mode  of  taxation  leads  to  the  most 
dangerous  and  the  most  mischievous  results.  If  gentlemen 
will  look  at  the  tariff  proposed  in  England,  they  will  find  that 
the  duties  are  specific  wherever  it  is  possible  to  make  them 
so.  And  why  ? Why  was  this  done  by  so  wise,  and  experi- 
enced, and  cautious  a nation?  Because,  in  imposing  an  ad 
valorem  duty,  regard  is  always  had  to  the  cost  of  the  article 
abroad,  and  not  where  the  duty  is  paid.  It  may  be  asked 
why  this  is  ? Why  not  calculate  the  duty  on  the  value  of  the 
article  where  imported?  Because  it  is  found  impracticable. 
There  are  different  qualities  of  the  same  article,  and  men’s 
opinions  as  to  those  qualities  are  always  found  to  differ. 
Hence,  ad  valorem  duties  cannot  be  made  uniform.  Thus, 
a gallon  of  wine  imported  into  New  York  may  there  have 
one  value;  a gallon  of  the  very  same  wine,  imported  into 
Charleston,  may  have  there  a higher  or  a lower  value : it  is 
a matter  of  opinion.  And  if  the  duties  are  to  be  levied  on 
this  “home  valuation,”  as  it  is  called,  the  duties  will  not  be 
uniform,  as  the  Constitution  requires  them  to  be. 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


227 


To  avoid  this,  the  value  is  taken  as  in  the  foreign  market 
whence  the  article  is  imported,  or  where  it  is  made ; to  which 
is  added  the  freight  and  other  charges,  save  insurance.  But 
how  is  this  foreign  value  ascertained?  First,  by  the  invoice, 
which  ought  to  be  the  best  evidence  possible ; but  every  one 
must  see  that  there  is  a very  strong  temptation  to  the  pro- 
duction of  fraudulent  invoices;  and  such  is  the  weakness, 
not  to  say  wickedness,  of  human  nature  that  experience 
proves  the  temptation  often  to  be  too  strong  to  be  resisted. 
The  importer  is  supplied  with  two  invoices:  one  in  which 
the  real  value  of  the  goods  is  set  down,  another  in  which  they 
are  charged  far  below  the  true  amount.  The  latter  is  pro- 
duced to  the  collector,  and  thus  the  revenue  is  defrauded; 
and  so  shamefully  common  has  this  become  that  an  honest 
man  cannot  compete  in  this  branch  of  business  without  com- 
promising his  conscience  and  character ; hence  it  has  fallen 
chiefly  into  the  hands  of  a set  of  foreigners  who  thus 
exclude  our  own  citizens  from  the  honest  and  honorable 
profits  which  their  enterprise  would  otherwise  secure  to 
them,  and  drive  them  out  of  their  own  trade  in  their  own 
market. 

There  remains,  then,  the  other  mode  of  levying  the 
specific  duties.  And  what  are  the  objections  urged  against 
it?  It  is  said,  first,  that  it  exacts  the  same  amount  of  duty 
on  the  same  quantity  of  goods,  whether  of  a poorer  or  a 
better  quality ; and  on  this  point  an  appeal  is  often  made  to 
popular  prejudices.  I admit  that,  so  far  as  variation  in 
value  is  concerned,  it  is  unavoidable,  under  a specific  duty, 
that  the  same  tax  should  be  paid  on  a poor  article  as  on  one 
more  valuable.  But  is  there  no  compensation  for  this? 
Certainly  there  is : it  often  protects  the  poor  from  frauds ; 
and,  what  is  of  great  consequence  to  the  general  welfare  of 
the  country,  it  induces  the  importation  of  a better  article, 
because  it  pays  more  duty  on  account  of  its  increased  value. 

Another  objection  against  specific  duties  is,  that  the  duty 
continues  at  one  fixed  rate,  while  the  value  of  the  taxed 
article  fluctuates  from  time  to  time,  either  in  consequence  of 
the  investment  of  more  capital,  or  of  improved  machinery 


228 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


and  greater  skill  in  its  manufacture.  By  this  means  a duty 
which,  when  first  laid,  might  be  very  proper,  in  process  of 
time  becomes  prohibitory.  As  the  value  of  the  article  falls, 
the  relative  amount  of  duty  increases,  and  vice  versa. 

I admit  there  is  something  in  this.  The  committee  felt 
the  force  of  the  objection,  and  to  meet  it  they  have  done  in 
this  bill  what  never  was  done  before:  they  have  required 
the  collectors  of  the  several  ports  to  report  the  monthly  value 
of  goods  imported,  both  the  custom-house  value  and  the 
wholesale  market  value.  The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is 
required  to  make  from  these  returns  a monthly  abstract,  and 
to  publish  it  to  the  country ; and,  in  addition  to  this,  he  is 
required  to  ascertain  whether  any  article  is  charged  over 
thirty  per  cent,  on  the  market  value,  and  if  so,  to  report  the 
fact  to  Congress:  so  that,  should  there  be  any  gross  in- 
equality growing  out  of  the  specific  duty,  it  shall  annually  be 
brought  to  the  notice  of  Congress  and  of  the  country. 

We  have  been  induced  to  impose  specific  duties  wherever 
it  was  possible,  with  a view  to  avoid  frauds.  For  although 
frauds  may  not  exist  to  anything  like  the  extent  which  has 
been  supposed,  yet  the  mere  suspicion  and  general  persua- 
sion that  they  do  is  nearly  as  bad  in  its  practical  result.  I 
wish  that  the  citizens  of  this  country  should  feel  entire  con- 
fidence that  they  are  not  paying  a higher  duty  than  the 
foreign  mercenary  who  has  no  conscience  in  his  way. 

There  is  one  other  subject  on  which  it  is  proper  I should 
say  a few  words,  and  that  is  the  subject  of  cash  duties.  All 
know  that  heretofore  a credit  of  three  and  six  months  has 
been  allowed  on  most  articles;  but  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  has  recommended  the  cash  system,  and  the  com- 
mittee has,  to  a great  extent,  adopted  his  recommendation. 

Every  one  will,  therefore,  see  that  this  change  is  a matter 
of  the  greatest  consequence.  Opinions  in  regard  to  its 
effects  are  widely  different.  Some  say  that  its  operation 
will  be  to  destroy  commerce  entirely;  others  insist  that  its 
effect  will  be  highly  salutary  in  preventing  the  European 
manufacturer  from  getting  rid  of  his  surplus  stock  by  throw- 
ing it  into  our  auction  rooms,  while  he  is  getting  a credit  at 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


229 


the  custom-house,  and  thus  injuring  all  fair  trade.  My 
own  opinion  is,  for  several  reasons,  in  favor  of  adopting  the 
system.  I have  looked  into  the  documents  and  records  on 
this  subject,  to  discover  what  amount  has  been  lost  to  the 
Treasury  from  the  effects  of  the  credit  system,  and  I find 
from  a report  made  in  1837-8,  that  it  was  there  stated  at 
about  seven  millions;  and  this,  I think,  was  before  the 
effects  of  the  great  revulsion  which  took  place  in  1836-7, 
because  the  payment  of  the  bonds  then  due  was  postponed 
by  Congress.  By  giving  the  merchants  credit  on  their  duties, 
the  Treasury  has  lost  seven  millions.  And  why  should  this 
risk  be  run  ? Why  should  this  special  favor  be  extended  to 
the  importing  merchant?  What  right  has  he  to  claim  it? 
Why  should  Government  run  the  risks  of  his  business  any 
more  than  that  of  another  man’s?  There  can  be  no  reason, 
so  far  as  I can  see,  unless  it  is  our  policy  to  encourage 
excessive  importations ; and  this  is  a policy  which  I,  for  one, 
cannot  approve.  I think  our  importations  have  been  vastly 
too  great,  and  have  involved  us  in  a debt  which  presses 
heavily  upon  the  nation.  I would  do  nothing  to  encourage 
or  aggravate  such  a condition  of  things. 

Although  I am  in  favor  of  cash  duties,  in  preference  to 
the  practice  which  has  heretofore  prevailed,  I am  also  in 
favor  of  a modified  warehousing  system.  This  I consider  as 
the  true  substitute  for  the  credit  system.  The  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  has  not,  indeed,  made  any  recommendation  on 
this  subject,  because,  as  he  states,  he  has  not  had  the  time 
to  examine  it.  He  leaves  it  entirely  to  Congress.  The 
warehousing  plan  forms  no  part  or  feature  of  his  project, 
and  therefore  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  have  not 
considered  it  their  duty  to  enter  into  the  subject,  as  they 
otherwise  would  have  done. 

What  are  the  benefits  it  is  calculated  to  produce  ? 

The  plan  has  been  adopted  in  Europe  for  many  years. 
Indeed,  it  is  about  a century  since  the  first  attempt  was  made 
to  introduce  it  into  England,  under  the  administration  of  Sir 
Robert  Walpole ; but  so  great  were  the  clamors  of  the  mer- 
chants, who  had  been  so  long  in  the  habit  of  defrauding  the 


230 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842 . 


Government  by  obtaining  credit  on  their  bonds,  that  the 
Administration  was  finally  forced  to  abandon  the  scheme. 
Indeed,  Walpole  was  at  one  time  in  danger  of  losing  his 
life  by  a mob,  in  consequence  of  his  endeavors  to  carry  it 
through  Parliament.  Since  then,  it  never  had  been  success- 
fully attempted,  until  1803,  when  it  was  adopted  by  the 
British  Government,  and  has  been  practised  ever  since.  I 
have  here  a synopsis  of  the  acts  in  reference  to  it.  The 
warehousing  system  is  a provision  of  lodging  imported 
articles  in  warehouses,  until  they  are  taken  out  and  entered 
and  duties  paid  for  home  consumption:  if  they  are  re- 
exported, the  duty  is  remitted. 

[Here  Mr.  Fillmore  read  to  some  extent  from  McCulloch, 
giving  a history  of  the  warehousing  system,  as  practised  in 
England.] 

Thus,  it  is  seen  that  the  scheme  has  worked  well  in  Eng- 
land. In  this  country  it  was  introduced  in  1791,  and  has 
been  in  use  ever  since  in  reference  to  teas  and  some  other 
articles. 

But  there  is  an  objection  urged  against  it  which,  if  estab- 
lished, is  like  to  prove  fatal.  The  experience  of  Great 
Britain,  it  is  said,  has  proved  that  it  will  not  do  to  establish 
warehouses  in  all  the  small  ports  of  the  kingdom,  and  they 
have  therefore  selected  certain  of  the  greater  importing 
towns  where  alone  the  system  is  in  operation.  Now,  our 
Constitution  declares  that  no  preference  shall  be  given  to  the 
ports  of  one  State  over  those  of  another  in  the  imposition 
of  duties,  which  must  be  uniform  throughout  the  United 
States ; and  it  is  said  that,  if  we  shall  pursue  the  British 
plan  of  establishing  warehouses  only  in  certain  of  the 
greater  sea-ports,  or  if  Congress  shall  by  law  authorize  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  do  so,  it  will,  in  effect,  be  giving 
a preference  to  those  ports,  and  so  will  be  a violation  of  the 
Constitution.  With  all  due  deference  to  gentlemen  who 
urge  this  constitutional  objection,  to  me  it  does  not  seem 
that  such  a consequence  will  follow.  We  have  the  system 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


231 


now,  in  regard  to  some  articles,  and  we  may  extend  it ; and 
if  we  do,  the  operation,  in  regard  to  the  small  ports  and  the 
large,  will  be  like  that  of  the  post  office  system  in  regard  to 
the  great  mail  routes  and  the  small — the  one  compensates 
for  the  other. 

The  great  collections  at  New  York,  for  instance,  will 
supply  the  means  of  paying  for  the  system  in  smaller  ports ; 
and  thus,  by  a general  system,  the  whole  country  will  col- 
lectively be  benefited.  No  plan  seems  to  me  so  well  calcu- 
lated to  secure  the  dues  of  the  Government,  while  at  the 
same  time  it  extends  accommodation  to  the  merchant.  At 
all  events  I am  in  favor  of  trying  it.  I do  not  think  that  it 
involves  any  violation  of  the  Constitution.  The  object  of 
that  provision  in  the  Constitution  which  is  said  to  prohibit 
it  was  manifestly  to  prevent  a preference  of  one  State  over 
another,  by  exacting  less  duties  in  the  ports  of  the  one  than 
in  those  of  the  other.  It  certainly  could  not  be  to  make  the 
advantages  of  every  port  in  the  United  States  equal : Nature 
herself  has  rendered  that  impossible.  The  intent  was  to 
guard  against  a combination  of  some  of  the  States  to  take 
advantage  of  others — to  prevent  the  great  States  from  op- 
pressing the  smaller.  But  this  has  nothing  to  do  with  that 
question.  I am,  as  I said,  in  favor  of  trying  the  plan. 
Indeed,  I apprehend  it  will  be  unavoidable  if  we  introduce 
the  system  of  cash  duties.  It  might  be  very  proper  to  make 
some  difference  as  to  goods  coming  from  beyond  the  Cape 
of  Good  Hope ; but  that  is  easily  arranged.  I hope  the 
committee  on  Commerce  will  report  us  a bill  presenting  a 
matured  plan. 

When  I say  that  this  bill  contains  nothing  of  it,  I do  not 
mean  to  be  understood  that  there  is  not  here  some  substitute 
for  it.  The  bill  provides  that,  when  goods  are  imported 
from  beyond  the  Cape,  they  may  remain  in  store  ninety  days 
before  the  duties  are  exacted,  and  in  all  other  cases  sixty 
days. 

Although  there  are  in  this  bill  some  other  subjects  of  a 
general  nature,  I have  detained  the  committee  so  long  that 
I will  not  now  go  further  into  its  provisions. 


232 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


I must,  however,  before  concluding,  say  a word  or  two 
touching  the  item  in  the  clause  now  under  consideration:  I 
mean  the  article  of  wool.  Some  gentleman  will  probably 
differ  from  the  views  of  the  committee  on  this  subject. 
There  seems,  indeed,  to  have  been  some  doubt  in  the  mind  of 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  in  regard  to  it.  The  duty 
heretofore  has  been  forty  per  cent,  ad  valorem,  and  four 
cents  per  pound  on  wool  worth  over  eight  cents.  This  was 
originally  equal  to  about  fifty  per  cent,  ad  valorem;  but  it 
has  been  gradually  coming  down  under  the  Compromise 
Act. 

I have  had  some  trouble  in  finding  the  amount  of  impor- 
tation under  the  high  duty.  There  is  this  difference  between 
wool  and  many  other  articles ; being  produced  not  in  one  or 
two  confined  spots  and  by  comparatively  few  persons,  but  in 
a wide-spreading  region  and  by  great  numbers  of  people,  far 
separated  from  each  other,  there  can  be  no  combinations  and 
conspiracies  to  keep  up  its  price.  Such  combinations  not 
only  may  but  do  exist  in  regard  to  other  things.  I have 
lately  heard  of  some  very  strange  facts  on  that  subject.  I 
have  found  that  the  iron-makers  in  England  agree  to  regu- 
late the  quantity  of  iron  produced,  and  thus  to  keep  up  its 
price  to  a certain  fixed  standard,  just  as  the  proprietors  of 
our  steamboats,  in  some  places,  agree  to  run  only  so  many 
boats  at  a prescribed  rate  of  fare. 

If  it  is  found  that  there  is  a surplus  number  of  forges, 
the  proprietors  get  together  and  make  a decree  that  only  a 
certain  quantity  of  iron  shall  be  produced ; and  this  is  either 
distributed  pro  rata  among  all  the  forges,  or  some  of  the 
forges  are  suspended  from  working.  Nay,  I have  heard 
what  is  still  more  extraordinary.  In  Sweden,  the  Govern- 
ment annually  regulates  the  amount  of  iron  produced  in  the 
same  manner  and  on  the  same  principle,  and  also  with  a view 
to  prevent  the  forests  being  too  much  invaded  for  the  manu- 
facture of  charcoal ; and  the  proprietors  quietly  submit  to 
the  regulation. 

The  same  thing  can  at  any  time  be  accomplished  where 
there  are  but  few  engaged  in  the  same  branch  of  work,  and 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


233 


where  they  are  concentrated  into  a narrow  space;  but  this 
cannot  be  the  case  in  regard  to  wool.  Its  product  is  spread 
over  different  States;  there  is  and  can  be  no  combination. 
The  price  of  the  article  is  regulated  by  the  fixed  laws  of 
demand  and  supply,  and  by  these  alone.  We  should  be 
careful  to  put  the  duty  as  high  as  we  can,  but  not  so  high 
as  to  be  prohibitory.  We  have  nothing  to  apprehend  from 
combinations. 

I have  received  a statement  from  the  Treasury  Depart- 
ment on  this  subject,  which  I will  lay  before  the  House.  It 
will  be  recollected  that,  since  1832,  all  wool  worth  less  than 
eight  cents  per  pound  at  the  place  whence  imported  has  been 
free.  This  will  account  for  the  large  importation  of  that 
article,  while  that  paying  so  high  a duty  has  been  constantly 
falling  off.  I regret  that  the  table  does  not  furnish  the 
exports  of  that  paying  duty,  that  we  might  judge  how  much 
remained  for  home  consumption. 

[The  table  here  submitted  exhibits  the  quantity  and  value 
of  manufactured  wool  imported  into  the  United  States  annu- 
ally from  1822  to  1841,  with  the  amount  of  duty  thereon.] 

It  will  be  perceived  by  this  table  that  the  importations  of 
the  free  article  for  the  last  four  years  have  been  gradually 
increasing;  that  in  1831  more  than  5,000,000  pounds  of  that 
paying  a duty  was  imported;  if  I recollect  right,  the  duty 
then  was  fifty  per  cent,  ad  valorem , and  four  cents  a pound. 
For  the  last  three  years,  notwithstanding  the  duty  under  the 
Compromise  Act  has  come  down  to  about  thirty-seven  or 
thirty-eight  per  cent.,  yet  only  a little  over  half  a million  has 
been  imported — an  amount  certainly  quite  too  small  to  affect 
the  general  price.  It  appears  from  the  last  census  that  there 
are  about  20,000,000  of  sheep  in  the  United  States,  and  it  has 
been  estimated  that  they  produce  annually  about  50,000,000 
pounds  of  wool.  Much  of  this  is  manufactured  by  families. 
Nevertheless  it  is  apparent  that  most  of  our  woollen  manu- 
factories are  supplied  from  this  source,  with  very  little 
competition  from  abroad,  as  it  is  understood  that  the  coarse 


234 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


wool  under  eight  cents  does  not  come  in  competition  with 
ours. 

There  is  a statement  at  page  72  of  the  proceedings  of  the 
“National  Convention  for  the  Protection  of  American  In- 
terests,” held  at  New  York  in  April  last,  purporting  to  give 
the  average  price  of  wool  in  Windsor,  Vermont,  from  1835 
to  1841,  inclusive.  I know  not  how  far  it  can  be  relied  on, 
but  it 1 shows  a very  great  reduction  in  the  price  of  the 
article,  wholly  independent  of  foreign  importations.  The 
committee,  after  considerable  deliberation,  did  not  think  it 
advisable  to  change  the  duty  recommended  by  the  Secretary 
in  his  bill,  and  left  it  thirty  per  cent.  It  may  be  too  high  or 
too  low ; but,  if  I can  be  satisfied  that  we  can  go  still  higher, 
and  not  render  the  duty  prohibitory,  I am  ready  to  do  it.  It 
is  due  to  this  large  and  meritorious  class  of  agriculturists, 
and  is  necessary  for  the  purpose  of  revenue,  to  raise  this 
duty  as  high  as  can  be  done  and  make  it  available ; but  it 
must  not  be  so  high  as  to  prevent  the  manufacturer  from 
purchasing,  for  in  that  case  you  destroy  the  home  market 
for  the  wool,  and  your  duties  will  neither  produce  revenue 
nor  protection,  but  the  wool  grower  will  have  to  seek  a 
market  in  foreign  countries,  where  no  duties  can  aid  him, 
but  he  will  meet  the  competition  of  the  whole  world.  I 
therefore  warn  my  friends  who  are  interested  in  this  not  to 
overreach  themselves,  by  raising  the  duty  too  high,  lest  they 
lose  all.  It  may  be  difficult  to  ascertain  the  exact  point ; but 
probably  the  intelligent  gentlemen  from  Vermont,  who  take 
a deep  interest  .in  this  question,  may  afford  us  some  facts 
and  arguments  that  will  settle  the  question  to  the  satisfac- 
tion of  the  House. 

But,  sir,  I will  not  dwell  upon  it.  I feel  exhausted  myself, 
and  fear  I have  worried  the  patience  of  the  House  with  this 
long  and  imperfectly  digested  statement  of  the  provisions  of 
this  bill.  I feel  that  I owe  the  House  an  apology  for  the 
very  imperfect  and  unsatisfactory  manner  in  which  I have 


1.  The  statement  cited  shows  the  price  of  wool  per  pound  to  have  ranged 
as  follows:  In  1835,  6 2 cents;  1836,  65  cents;  1837,  50  cents;  1838,  40  cents; 

1839,  42  cents;  1840,  40  cents;  1841,  36  cents. 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


235 


been  able  to  discharge  the  duty  devolved  on  me ; but  constant 
and  unwearied  attention  in  the  committee  room  to  the  details 
of  the  bill  has  prevented  that  attention  to  the  general  subject 
that  was  due  to  its  importance.  It  only  remains  that  I return 
my  most  sincere  and  grateful  thanks  to  the  House  for  the 
kind  and  patient  indulgence  with  which  it  has  listened  to  my 
remarks,  for  which  I feel  that  I am  indebted  rather  to  the 
interest  felt  in  the  subject  itself  than  to  anything  in  my 
manner  of  presenting  it. 

December  15,  1842,  Mr.  Fillmore  shared  in  the  debate  on 
the  Civil  and  Diplomatic  Appropriation  Bill,  his  remarks 
relating  chiefly  to  clerk  hire ; at  his  instance,  certain  salary 
appropriations  were  reduced.  January  7,  1843,  he  offered 
the  following,  which  was  adopted : 

Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  of  War  be  directed  to  communi- 
cate to  this  House  any  reports  in  relation  to  the  lake  harbors  which 
may  have  been  received  since  his  annual  report. 

Later  he  offered  resolutions  discharging  the  Committee 
of  Ways  and  Means  from  further  consideration  of  appro- 
priations for  certain  lighthouses,  of  certain  measures  re- 
ferring to  Wisconsin  Territory,  etc.,  etc.,  sometimes  with 
remarks  in  explanation.  An  item  in  the  Army  Appropria- 
tion Bill  for  completing  an  arsenal  at  Fayetteville,  N.  C., 
precipitated  debate  which  ran  through  several  days,  in 
which  Mr.  Fillmore  shared. 

On  January  23,  1843,  Mr.  Fillmore  asked  and  received 
the  permission  of  the  House  that  he  might  make  a personal 
explanation  in  reference  to  himself  and  the  Committee  of 
Ways  and  Means.  He  submitted  to  the  House  editorial  and 
other  articles  from  the  New  York  Union , an  Administration 
paper  of  the  city  of  New  York,  and  from  the  Madisonian, 
of  the  same  city,  in  which  serious  charges  were  made 
against  the  integrity  of  Mr.  Fillmore  and  his  committee.  It 


236 


ON  THE  TARIFF  BILL  OF  1842. 


was  alleged  that  the  Exchequer  bill  was  defeated  by  a Whig 
caucus,  and  that  Mr.  Clay  had  sent  to  the  committee  a letter 
hostile  to  Administration  interests.  It  was  claimed  that  by 
these  means  the  Exchequer  bill  was  defeated  by  the  caucus. 
Mr.  Fillmore  denied  that  any  caucus  was  held  as  alleged  in 
the  reports ; denied  that  the  Whig  leaders  made  any  furious 
attack  on  the  President  and  the  Administration ; and  that  a 
letter  from  Mr.  Clay  had  been  read  during  the  caucus.  He 
concluded  in  substance  as  follows : 

Having  denied,  as  he  did  peremptorily  and  emphatically, 
any  knowledge  of  the  subject,  he  had  only  to  say  further, 
that  all  the  statements  contained  in  the  two  articles  to  which 
he  had  called  the  attention  of  the  House  were,  so  far  as  he 
had  any  knowledge  of  the  subject,  unequivocally  false.  If 
any  members  here  knew  any  facts  or  circumstances  sustain- 
ing them,  he  begged  that  they  would  bring  them  out.  It  was 
due  to  the  subject,  and  due  to  the  country,  that  they  should 
speak  out,  if  they  had  anything  to  say  on  the  subject.  In 
justice  to  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  he  would  say 
that  they  took  up  the  subject  of  the  exchequer  with  a sincere 
desire  to  recommend  it,  or  some  similar  measure,  to  the 
House;  and  it  was  after  the  most  mature  and  serious  con- 
sideration that  they  came  to  the  conclusion  that  they  could 
only  perform  their  duty  to  the  country  by  recommending  its 
rejection.  He  did  not  know  that  his  duty  to  himself,  or  to 
the  committee,  required  that  he  should  say  more. 


PLAN  OF  AN  EXCHEQUER 


On  January  27,  1843,  Mr.  Fillmore  called  up  the  report  of 
his  Ways  and  Means  Committee  on  the  subject  of  the 
Exchequer,  the  question  being  on  the  motion  of  Mr.  Cushing 
to  amend  the  resolution  concluding  that  report  by  striking 
out  the  word  “not”;  that  is,  making  the  affirmation  that  it 
was  expedient  to  adopt  the  Executive  plan  of  the  exchequer. 

Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  at  length.  He  commenced  by  refer- 
ring to  the  charge  which  had  been  put  forth  that  the  Com- 
mittee of  Ways  and  Means,  in  proposing  no  affirmative 
action  on  the  subject  of  the  exchequer  had  neglected  to 
discharge  their  duty.  In  order  to  test  whether  they  had,  he 
should  content  himself  by  referring  to  the  manner  in  which 
the  question  was  presented  to  the  committee,  and  in  which  it 
now  stood  before  the  House  of  the  country,  as  admitted  by 
the  gentleman  from  Massachusetts.  More  than  a year  ago 
the  scheme  was  first  submitted  to  Congress,  and  then  re- 
ferred to  a Select  Committee,  a majority  of  whom  were  the 
friends  of  the  President.  After  two  and  a half  months  of 
reflection,  this  committee  reported  a substitute  for  the  plan 
of  the  Executive,  dispensing  with  its  main  features.  If, 
then,  any  modification  of  the  exchequer  were  wanted — if 
the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  had  neglected  to  dis- 
charge their  duty  in  reporting  modifications,  he  referred 
gentlemen  to  these  reported  by  the  friends  of  the  Adminis- 
tration. The  gentleman,  too,  who  made  the  objection  that 
the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  had  neglected  their  duty 
in  not  reporting  modifications,  since  they  could  agree  to  the 
plan  itself,  had  given  notice  that  he  would  move  to  substi- 


237 


238 


ON  THE  EXCHEQUER. 


tute  the  bill  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  for  his  own 
bill,  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  the  subject  before  the 
House  in  every  possible  shape.  Now,  he  submitted  it  to  the 
consideration  of  the  House,  whether  the  Committee  of  Ways 
and  Means  had  not  presented  the  subject  in  every  shape 
possible,  by  not  favoring  either  of  the  schemes?  The  gen- 
tleman from  Massachusetts  [Mr.  Cushing]  had  moved  to 
strike  out  the  word  “not”  so  as  to  make  the  resolution  of  the 
committee  an  affirmative  proposition.  He  would  state,  in 
reference  to  that  matter,  that  he  had  himself  risen  and  pro- 
posed the  word  be  stricken  out,  thereby  making  the  resolu- 
tion an  affirmative  instead  of  a negative  proposition.  He 
could  not  see  the  difference  between  voting  in  favor  of  a 
resolution  declaring  that  the  exchequer  should  “not”  be 
adopted,  and  voting  against  a resolution  declaring  that  it 
should  be  adopted.  If,  indeed,  there  were  any  in  the  House, 
who,  after  the  many  discussions  which  had  taken  place,  were 
unprepared  to  say  whether  they  were  in  favor  of,  or  against, 
the  exchequer,  he  was  sorry  for  it.  He  could  not  but  admire 
the  manly  independence  of  the  gentleman  from  Ohio  [Mr. 
Pendleton]  who  yesterday  told  the  House  that,  although 
many  of  his  constituents  had  petitioned  for  it,  he  must,  after 
a close  and  careful  examination  of  the  subject,  give  his  vote 
against  the  proposition.  It  was  a determination  resulting 
from  an  honest  conviction  of  the  heart,  which  he  admired. 
He  could  not  do  otherwise  than  commend  the  spirit  of  the 
man  who,  when  he  found  a measure  to  be  right,  resolved  to 
hold  himself  ready  to  sustain  it;  and  if  wrong,  to  condemn 
it.  Nor  could  he  think  that  there  were  men  in  the  House 
who  would  take  shelter  of  their  opinions  under  a negative 
proposition. 

After  some  further  remarks  upon  this  head,  Mr.  Fillmore 
proceeded  to  an  explanation  of  a position  which  was  taken 
in  the  report  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  and 
which,  he  understood,  was  misconceived  by  some  of  his 
friends. 

He  alluded  to  that  portion  of  the  report  which  spoke  of 
the  power  of  removal  from  office.  It  was  in  1835,  when 


ON  THE  EXCHEQUER. 


239 


the  whole  subject  was  under  debate  in  the  Senate,  and  when 
he  also  examined  the  subject,  that  he  came  to  the  conclusion 
that,  where  the  power  of  appointment  was  vested  in  the 
President  and  the  Senate,  in  that  case  the  President  and  the 
Senate  together  alone  had  the  power  of  removal.  In  sup- 
port of  the  position  he  maintained,  he  cited  the  reasoning 
on  the  subject  contained  in  the  Federalist , which  was  at  the 
time  of  its  adoption  held  to  be  the  true  construction  of  the 
Constitution.  In  that  work  it  was  argued  to  the  people, 
when  the  Constitution  was  pending  before  them  for  their 
adoption,  that  where  a concurrence  of  the  President  and 
Senate  was  necessary  to  appointment,  the  same  was  also 
requisite  to  removal  from  office.  The  Constitution  pro- 
vided no  power  of  removal.  That  only  resulted  from  the 
power  of  appointment.  He  stated  as  a remarkable  fact,  that, 
although  such  a debate  took  place  in  1835,  he  had  not,  after 
a diligent  search,  been  able  to  get  a printed  copy  of  Mr. 
Calhoun’s  bill.  He  found  a manuscript  copy,  together  with 
the  amendment  proposed,  among  the  archives  of  the  Gov- 
ernment ; and  as  it  passed  the  Senate,  the  only  principle 
asserted  was  this : it  repealed  the  law  limiting  the  tenure  of 
offices  to  four  years,  provided  that  the  only  limit  should 
be  in  case  of  defalcation ; and  declared  that  the  President 
should  assign  his  reasons  to  the  Senate  for  any  removal  he 
might  make.  There  was  no  principle  in  it  which  tended  to 
limit  the  power  of  removal.  Now,  his  own  opinion  was, 
that  the  President  possessed  no  such  power. 

He  noticed  the  objections  which  had  been  raised  to  a 
continuance  of  the  present  regulations  of  the  Treasury 
Department,  on  the  ground  that  the  laws  in  force  did  not 
provide  any  place  of  security  for  public  money,  and  also  that 
there  were  not  sufficient  provisions  of  law  for  the  punish- 
ment of  embezzlement.  The  gentleman  from  Massachusetts 
had  argued  that  there  were  no  provisions  for  the  punish- 
ment of  defaulters,  except  such  as  might  be  contained  in  the 
Act  of  1789,  and  the  resolution  of  1816. 

[Mr.  Cushing  said  his  proposition  was  more  qualified.] 


240 


ON  THE  EXCHEQUER. 


Mr.  Fillmore  alluded  to  the  supposition  entertained  by 
some,  that  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  had  omitted 
their  duty.  He  feared  the  House  had  forgotten  their  own 
action  on  the  subject. 

There  were  already  existing  by  law  ample  checks  and 
guards  for  the  security  of  the  public  money.  In  the  first 
place,  there  was  the  law  of  1789,  which  provides  that  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Treasurer  of  the  United  States  to 
receive  and  keep  the  moneys  of  the  United  States,  and  dis- 
burse them  upon  warrants  drawn  by  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury.  Mark  the  words : “disburse  them  upon  warrants 
drawn  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.”  Then,  what 
next?  As  to  the  medium  in  which  the  public  dues  shall  be 
paid,  we  have  the  joint  resolution  of  1816,  which  prescribes 
that  they  shall  be  paid  in  gold  and  silver,  treasury  notes,  and 
the  bills  of  specie-paying  banks.  Thus  we  have  the  provision 
designating  the  officers  who  shall  keep  the  public  money; 
and  next,  we  have  the  medium  in  which  it  shall  be  paid. 
Now,  he  wanted  to  know  what  more  there  was  in  the  famous 
exchequer  bill  which  came  from  the  Treasury,  or  that  of 
the  Select  Committee  of  this  House,  to  secure  the  public 
treasure  from  embezzlement?  Instead  of  calling  the  officer 
who  is  to  have  the  custody  of  the  public  money,  the  Treas- 
urer of  the  United  States,  the  bill  proposes  to  call  them  a 
board  of  exchequer,  though  one  of  them  is  to  be  this  same 
Treasurer.  First,  there  is  to  be  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury;  second,  the  Treasurer  of  the  United  States,  and 
then  there  are  to  be  three  commissioners  to  constitute  this 
board  of  exchequer.  The  system  now  in  operation  was  but 
a part  of  that  “one  idea”  which  provides  for  five  officers 
instead  of  one  to  do  the  same  thing,  and  who  are  to  be  ap- 
pointed in  the  same  manner,  viz.,  by  the  President  of  the 
United  States,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Senate.  But  it  had  been  said  that  there  was  now  no  security 
for  the  faithful  custody  and  disbursement  of  the  public 
money,  and  therefore  the  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means 
neglected  their  duty  in  failing  to  provide  for  it. 


ON  THE  EXCHEQUER. 


241 


Let  us,  said  Mr.  Fillmore,  look  a little  into  the  law  on 
this  subject.  Gentlemen  seemed  to  have  forgotten  that,  in 
repealing  the  independent  treasury,  they  left  untouched  the 
penal  part  of  it  providing  for  the  security  of  the  public 
money.  They  repealed  the  act  so  far  as  it  relates  to  the 
receivers  general,  and  the  public  buildings  for  the  deposit  of 
the  public  money,  together  with  the  provision  requiring  the 
public  dues  to  be  paid  in  gold  and  silver ; yet  the  penal  part 
of  the  act — which  secures  the  faithful  custody,  transfer,  and 
disbursement  of  the  public  money — this  House  had  not  the 
folly  to  repeal.  Not  only  did  they  retain  it,  but  they  added 
to  it.  There  were  the  most  ample  and  the  most  penal  pro- 
visions against  anybody  who  should  use  the  public  treasure. 
In  addition  to  the  penalty  imposed  by  the  sub-treasury  act, 
they  had  also  provided  for  the  evidence  by  which  guilt 
.should  be  ascertained — which  the  independent  treasury  act 
did  not  do. 

[Mr.  Fillmore  here  read  from  the  Act  of  August  13, 
1841,  repealing  the  independent  treasury  Act;  section  two 
of  which  provides  as  punishment  for  embezzlement,  that 
the  convicted  person  shall  “forfeit  and  pay  to  the  United 
States  a fine  equal  to  the  amount  of  the  money  embezzled, 
and  shall  suffer  imprisonment  for  a term  not  less  than  six 
months,  nor  more  than  five  years.”  He  continued:] 

There  was  the  law  as  it  now  stood.  Were  not  these  pro- 
visions penal  enough  to  satisfy  the  gentleman?  Had  the 
Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  neglected  their  duty,  in  not 
imposing  greater  penalties?  If  so,  he  would  point  them  to 
the  provisions  of  the  famous  exchequer  bill,  and  then  see  if 
that  measure  provided  better  securities  for  the  public  money 
than  now  existed.  Instead  of  prohibiting  the  public  officers 
from  using,  investing,  or  loaning  the  public  money,  they 
were  expressly  authorized  to  do  it.  He  asked  if  the  Com- 
mittee of  Ways  and  Means  had  neglected  their  duty,  when 
they  said  that  these  penalties  for  the  unfaithful  application 


242  ON  THE  EXCHEQUER . 

of  the  public  money  were  ample,  and  far  better  than  the 
exchequer  bill. 

But  he  had  occupied  more  time  on  this  subject  than  he 
had  supposed  he  would',  when  he  commenced.  He  had  a 
word  to  say  to  the  gentleman  from  Massachusetts,  Mr. 
Cushing,  and  others,  who  had  contended  that  this  exchequer 
was  not  a Government  bank. 

That  he  might  not  misrepresent  the  honorable  member 
from  Massachusetts,  who  spoke  first,  and  denied  that  this 
was  a Government  bank,  he  would  read  his  remarks  as  pub- 
lished ; and,  if  there  was  any  mistake  in  the  report  of  them, 
he  desired  that  he  would  correct  it. 

[Mr.  Fillmore  here  read  an  extract  from  Mr.  Cushing’s 
speech  on  the  exchequer  bill,  and  continued:] 

On  this  assertion  that  the  President  had  come  to  that 
House,  and  asked  to  be  relieved  from  the  discretion  vested 
in  him,  and  asked  to  have  his  power  defined  and  limited, 
he  would  appeal  to  facts  for  an  answer.  How  had  the 
President  asked  to  be  relieved?  The  laws,  as  had  been 
shown,  required  the  public  treasure  to  be  kept  in  the  cus- 
tody of  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States.  The  law,  as  it 
stood,  declared  that  if  that  Treasurer,  or  any  other  officer 
intrusted  with  any  public  money,  should  use  it,  or  lend  or 
invest  it,  or  in  any  other  way  dispose  of  it,  or  who  should 
refuse  or  neglect  to  pay  it  over  when  required  to  do  so,  the 
act  should  be  taken  and  deemed  to  be  an  embezzlement,  and 
should  be  punished  with  a fine  to  the  amount  of  the  whole 
sum  embezzled,  and  imprisonment  for  not  less  than  six 
months,  nor  more  than  five  years.  Now,  what  did  this  bill 
propose?  Did  it  propose  to  put  the  public  money  in  the 
hands  of  any  other  person  or  persons  than  those  appointed 
by  the  President  of  the  United  States  ? No.  On  the  con- 
trary, it  proposed  to  put  the  public  money  into  the  hands 
of  a host  of  receivers ; and  not  only  that,  but  to  put  in  their 
custody  at  the  same  place  the  hoards  of  private  individuals. 
Did  that  look  like  a desire  on  his  part  to  be  relieved  from 
responsibility?  Thrice  did  Marc  Antony  offer  the  crown 


ON  THE  EXCHEQUER. 


243 


to  Caesar  on  the  Lupercal,  and  thrice  did  he  refuse  it;  but 
he  apprehended  that  the  Executive  had  come  to  that  House 
with  no  such  feeling,  when  he  asked  to  be  relieved  from  his 
responsibility.  He  only  asked  to  have  it  increased  in  a ten- 
fold degree ; so  that  not  only  might  he  have  the  control  of 
the  public  treasure,  but  of  all  the  private  funds  and  banking 
of  the  nation.  But  to  return  to  the  speech  of  the  gentleman 
of  Massachusetts.  The  gentleman  said:  “Again  the  com- 
mittee insisted  that  the  treasury  board  was  virtually  a Gov- 
ernment bank.”  Yes  [said  Mr.  Fillmore]  we  did  insist  that 
it  was. 

[Mr.  Fillmore  again  quoted  at  length  from  Mr.  Cushing, 
showing  that  he  had  denied  “that  the  exchequer  was  a 
bank,”  although  it  “did  perform  acts  which  were  in  them- 
selves the  same  as  the  acts  of  a bank.”  He  continued:] 

But  the  gentleman  said  that  this  was  no  bank.  Had  he 
attempted  to  give  his  definition  of  what  a bank  was?  He 
said,  to  be  sure,  that  it  performed  the  functions  of  a bank; 
but  still  it  was  no  bank.  “Sir,”  said  Mr.  Fillmore,  “I  have 
been  somewhat  puzzled  myself  to  know  what  a bank  is.” 
He  had  a definition  of  a bank  here,  which  he  had  tran- 
scribed from  a work  lately  published,  called  “The  History 
of  Banking  in  the  United  States.”  According  to  that  defini- 
tion, a bank  was  “a  commercial  institution  or  repository  for 
the  purpose  of  receiving  the  money  of  individuals,  and  to 
improve  it  by  trafficking  in  merchandise,  bullion,  or  bills  of 
exchange ; and  may  be  of  a public  or  private  nature.”  Now, 
if  this  was  the  true  definition  of  a bank,  the  exchequer  cer- 
tainly was  one. 

In  the  first  place,  it  was  an  institution  or  repository,  in 
the  language  of  the  definition,  for  the  purpose  of  receiving 
the  money  of  individuals.  This  exchequer  proposed  a bank 
of  deposit  for  the  purpose  of  receiving  the  funds  of  indi- 
viduals, and  either  to  keep  them  in  security  professedly — 
how  far  it  might  do  that,  he  would  not  pretend  to  say — or 
to  improve  them  by  trafficking  in  goods,  bullion,  or  bills 


244 


ON  THE  EXCHEQUER. 


of  exchange.  This,  it  would  be  perceived,  it  was  expressly 
authorized  to  do ; for  it  was  to  deal  in  bills  of  exchange,  by 
buying  and  selling  them.  There  was  the  definition  from  one 
of  the  standard  works  of  the  country,  which  showed  that 
this  exchequer  was  a bank,  and  was  from  a writer  who  was 
disinterested,  and,  so  far  as  he  had  given  evidence  of  it, 
without  prejudice  on  the  subject.  But  Mr.  Fillmore  did  not 
press  this  definition  of  a bank.  A long  time  ago  they  had  a 
discussion  on  the  sub-treasury,  which  was  created  for  the 
collection,  safekeeping,  transfer,  and  disbursement  of  the 
public  money,  by  means  of  the  Government’s  own  officers. 
This  went  far  beyond  the  sub-treasury.  That  did  not  pro- 
pose the  buying  and  selling  of  bills  of  exchange;  this  did. 
That  did  not  propose  the  receiving  the  deposits  of  indi- 
viduals. That  did  not  propose  a board  of  directors ; this  did. 
That  did  not  propose  branches  in  the  States;  this  did.  It 
would,  therefore,  be  perceived  that  it  went  beyond  the  sub- 
treasury in  its  likeness  to  a bank. 

[Mr.  Fillmore  quoted  again  and  at  length  from  Mr. 
Cushing’s  speech,  turning  that  gentleman’s  words  upon  him- 
self, to  the  amusement  of  the  House.  After  further  scatter- 
ing debate,  Mr.  Cushing’s  amendment  (to  strike  out  the  word 
“not”  from  the  resolution  which  affirmed  that  it  was  “not” 
expedient  to  adopt  the  Executive  plan  of  the  exchequer), 
was  withdrawn ; and  the  resolution : “That  the  plan  of  an 

exchequer  presented  to  Congress  by  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  at  the  last  session  of  Congress,  entitled  ‘A  bill 
amendatory  of  the  several  acts  establishing  the  Treasury 
Department’  ought  not  to  be  adopted,”  was  adopted.] 

February  2d,  Mr.  Fillmore  shared  in  the  discussion  of 
a bill  “Concerning  the  Legislative  Assembly  of  Wisconsin.” 
He  stated  the  action  of  his  committee  relative  thereto,  in 
effect,  as  follows : 

At  the  last  session  of  Congress  an  appropriation  was 
made  for  Wisconsin  Territory  for  the  year  1842.  In 


VARIOUS  MEASURES. 


245 


recommending  the  appropriation,  however,  the  Committee 
of  Ways  and  Means  found  claims  for  very  large  arrearages, 
which  they  refused  to  allow,  and  they  only  recommended  the 
amount  of  appropriation  that  had  been  made  the  year  before. 
When  the  bill  came  up  in  the  House  a motion  was  made  to 
insert  an  appropriation  for  arrearages,  which  was  rejected. 
The  bill  then  went  to  the  Senate,  and  finally  for  the  purpose 
of  avoiding  these  arrearages  in  future  a section  was  inserted, 
providing  that,  hereafter,  no  sessions  of  the  territorial  legis- 
latures shall  be  held  without  an  appropriation  from  Congress 
to  pay  them. 

In  the  concluding  days  of  the  third  session  of  the  Twenty- 
seventh  Congress,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  exceedingly  active  in 
the  discharge  of  his  duty  as  chairman  of  the  Committee  of 
Ways  and  Means.  On  a large  number  of  the  bills  reported 
he  spoke  at  some  length.  The  range  of  subjects  covered  is 
considerable,  but  few  of  them  are  of  a character  to  demand 
attention  here. 

February  8th,  he  argued  at  length  in  behalf  of  the  Navy 
Appropriation  Bill,  stating  in  detail  the  reductions  recom- 
mended by  the  committee. 

On  the  13th  of  February,  he  led  the  debate  on  the  Army 
Appropriation  Bill.  This  led  him  into  a statement  of  the 
labors  that  had  fallen  to  his  committee  during  that  session. 
The  present,  he  said,  was  the  third  session  and  during  its 
continuance  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  had  to  per- 
form the  duty  of  examining  a double  set  of  appropriation 
bills  for  the  half  calendar  year  and  for  the  fiscal  year ; they 
had  also  before  them  a proposition  to  bring  back  into  the 
Treasury  money  which  was  said  to  have  been  hitherto 
squandered ; also  the  recommendation  of  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  that  means  should  be  provided  for,  to  carry  the 
Department  through  the  year  to  the  1st  of  January  next; 
and  also  an  exchequer  project,  which  had  occupied  much  of 
their  time.  He  defended  at  length  his  committee  from  the 


246 


VARIOUS  MEASURES. 


charges  that  they  had  abandoned  all  measures  to  carry  the 
Government  through  the  year.  It  was  only  necessary,  he 
said,  for  the  President  in  the  exercise  of  his  power  to  control 
the  expenditures  of  these  appropriations  not  to  exhaust  the 
Treasury  by  paying  them  over  before  they  were  absolutely 
needed,  and  thus  create  the  necessity  of  an  extra  session.  If 
there  should  be  no  more  expense  during  the  year  than  what 
was  appropriated  by  Congress  for  that  period,  in  his  opinion 
the  ways  and  means  of  the  Treasury  would  be  sufficient. 
He  only  asked  that  the  Government  might  be  administered 
as  it  had  been  in  years  past.  . . . 

February  20th,  he  explained  at  length  the  object  of  a bill 
“To  bring  into  the  Treasury  certain  moneys  received  by 
public  officers  before  they  can  be  disbursed  and  for  other 
purposes.” 

February  23d,  for  his  committee,  he  made  report  on  a 
Message  of  the  President,  with  a letter  of  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  accompanying  on  the  subject  of  finances,  and 
offered  resolutions  relating  to  the  same.  On  the  same  day, 
the  question  being  on  the  passage  of  “An  Act  to  provide  for 
the  better  security  of  the  lives  of  passengers  on  board  of 
vessels  propelled  in  the  whole  or  part  by  steam,”  Mr. 
Fillmore  opposed  a proposed  exemption  of  any  kind  of 
steamboat  machinery  from  the  operation  of  a law  to  which 
others  were  subject.1 


1.  It  had  been  proposed  to  exempt  steamboats  propelled  by  Ericsson’s  pro- 
pellers from  the  law  requiring  steamboats  to  be  provided  with  fire-buckets  and 
engines.  Mr.  Fillmore’s  opposition  to  this  proposed  exemption  elicited  from 
Mr.  David  P.  Brewster  of  Oswego  a statement  which  embodies  interesting 
facts  of  lake  history. 

In  the  summer  of  1842,  several  enterprising  citizens  of  Oswego  constructed 
a number  of  vessels,  to  be  impelled  partly  by  sails,  and  partly  by  Ericsson’s 
propellers,  for  the  trade  of  the  lakes,  and  particularly  for  the  purpose  of  going 
through  the  Welland  canal.  Steamboats  constructed  in  the  ordinary  way  not 
being  able  to  go  through  that  canal,  these  gentlemen,  together  with  a number 
of  other  citizens,  petitioned  Congress  that  the  vessels  of  the  above  description, 
thus  intended  for  the  lake  trade,  should  be  exempted  from  the  penalties  of 
the  Act  of  1838,  requiring  steamboats  to  be  provided  with  additional  boats  and 
fire-engines,  on  the  ground  that  they  were  intended  solely  for  freight  boats,  and 
not  for  passengers.  In  the  year  1838,  when  this  law  was  first  enacted,  pur- 
porting to  be  a law  to  secure  the  safety  of  passengers  in  steamboats,  Mr. 
Brewster  was  presiding  over  an  insurance  company;  and  the  question  arose 


VARIOUS  MEASURES. 


247 


Other  subjects  on  which  Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  in  these  last 
days  of  his  last  session  in  Congress,  were : Contract  labor 
for  convicts  in  State  penitentiaries,  appropriations  for  Cus- 
tom-houses, for  the  Brooklyn  dry  dock,  for  defraying  the 
expense  of  printing  the  Compendium  of  the  Sixth  Census ; 
and  the  Treasury  Note  Bill.  His  labors  as  Representative 
in  Congress  closed  on  March  3d,  the  final  day  of  the  session, 
by  reporting  the  Civil  and  Diplomatic  Appropriation  Bill, 
explaining  its  provisions  at  length  and  moving  its  adoption. 


whether  this  law  was  so  calculated  to  effect  the  object  in  view,  as  to  authorize 
them  to  diminish  the  rates  of  insurance;  and,  after  a full  debate,  this  question 
was  decided  in  the  negative.  The  prevalent  opinion  of  the  board,  however, 
was  that  the  law,  so  far  from  diminishing  the  hazard  of  human  life,  increased 
it.  The  opposite  opinion  evidently  prevailed  in  the  House  of  Representatives 
at  the  time  of  this  debate.  Mr.  Fillmore,  replying  to  Mr.  Brewster,  intimated 
his  good  will  toward  the  commerce  of  Oswego,  but  took  the  ground  that  one 
class  of  steamboats  should  not  be  exempted  from  restrictions  imposed  on  the 
others.  “It  was  well  known  that  all  the  steamboats  navigating  the  lakes  were 
propelled,  in  part,  by  sails,  as  well  as  those  which  were  fitted  with  Ericsson’s 
propellers;  and  that  numbers  of  the  emigrants  took  passage  in  these  freight 
boats,  because  they  could  travel  in  them  at  a less  expense.”  It  was  to  protect 
the  lives  of  this  numerous  class,  that  he  thought  the  restriction  should  be 
imposed  on  the  freight  boats  as  well  as  the  passenger  boats.  The  bill  passed 
with  Mr.  Fillmore’s  amendment. 

Ericsson’s  first  use  of  the  screw  propeller  in  this  country,  in  the  warship 
Princeton,  was  in  1841.  In  that  year  Capt.  James  Van  Cleve  of  Lewiston 
saw  Ericsson’s  model  in  New  York.  Ericsson  offered  Van  Cleve  a half  interest 
in  his  patent  for  the  great  lakes  if  Van  Cleve  would  place  on  Lake  Ontario, 
within  a year,  a steam  vessel  equipped  with  the  new  wheel.  Van  Cleve 
assented  and  a contract  was  signed.  This  was  in  December,  1840.  Van 
Cleve  went  to  Oswego,  interested  others  in  the  enterprise,  and  built  and 
launched  the  Vandalia,  of  138  tons,  the  first  vessel  on  the  lakes  to  use  the 
screw  propeller.  She  made  her  first  trip  in  November,  1841,  and  proved  a 
success. 


MR.  FILLMORE  AS 


COMPTROLLER 

OF  NEW  YORK  STATE 


JANUARY  1,  1848,  TO  FEBRUARY  20,  1849 


MR.  FILLMORE  AS 


NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER 

JANUARY  1,  1848,  TO  FEBRUARY  20,  1849 


Mr.  Fillmore  took  up  his  duties  as  Comptroller  of  the 
State  of  New  York  on  January  i,  1848.  In  June  of  that 
year  he  was  nominated  for  Vice-President,  and  elected  in 
November.  He  resigned  his  office  as  Comptroller  February 
20,  1849. 

The  greater  part  of  his  correspondence  as  Comptroller 
was  of  a routine  character,  in  the  discharge  of  the  regular 
business  of  the  office.  The  following  only  are  selected  either 
because  they  supply  data  for  local  history — usually  that  of 
Buffalo — or  because  they  throw  light  on  matters  of  New 
York  State  history;  or  because  they  reveal  somewhat  of 
Mr.  Fillmore’s  character — his  thoroughness,  his  devotion 
to  the  task  in  hand,  his  unassailable  integrity. 


251 


LETTERS  AS  COMPTROLLER 


AN  OLD  BUFFALO  CITY  BANK  CASE. 

Comptroller's  Office,  Albany,  Jan.  26,  1848. 

Dear  sir  : On  the  4th  of  February,  1840,  a judgment  was 
rendered  in  the  Supreme  Court  for  $805.63  against  Jacob 
A.  Barker  and  Horatio  A.  Holt  at  the  suit  of  the  Buffalo 
City  Bank.  This  judgment  has  been  duly  assigned  to  the 
Comptroller,  for  the  benefit  of  the  Bank  Fund,1  by  an  order 
of  the  Court  of  Chancery. 

I have  thought  best  to  have  the  matter  enquired  into,  and 
write  you  for  that  purpose.  You  will  confine  your  enquiries 
for  the  present  to  the  responsibility  of  Mr.  Barker  and  to  his 
ability  to  pay  the  judgment,  should  an  effort  be  made  to 
enforce  its  collection  and  communicate  to  me  the  informa- 
tion you  may  be  enabled  to  obtain ; and  if  he  cannot  pay  the 
whole  amount,  state  to  me  the  terms  upon  which  it  would 
be  best  to  compromise  the  judgment  with  him. 

Respectfully  yours, 

M.  Fillmore, 

Comptroller . 

E.  C.  Sprague,  Esq.,  Buffalo. 


TO  INCREASE  THE  COMPTROLLER'S  POWERS. 

Albany,  January  29,  1848. 
To  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  New  York: 

I respectfully  represent  that  by  reference  to  the  4th  and 
5th  sections  of  the  act  entitled  “An  Act  to  authorize  the 

1.  So  in  original. 


252 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


253 


business  of  banking,”  passed  April  18,  1838,  it  will  be  seen 
that  in  case  any  person  or  association  possessing  banking 
privileges  under  said  act,  shall  fail  or  refuse  to  pay  their  bills 
or  notes,  the  Comptroller  is  authorized,  after  public  notice, 
“to  sell,  at  public  auction,  the  public  stocks  pledged,  or  the 
bonds  and  mortgages  assigned”  for  the  security  and  pay- 
ment of  such  bills  or  notes.  There  is  no  power  in  the  Comp- 
troller to  foreclose  the  mortgages,  but  only  to  sell  them; 
and  there  may  be  a sacrifice  on  such  sale,  to  the  loss  of  bill- 
holders,  when  the  land  itself  would  be  abundant  security, 
which  might  be  available  if  there  was  a power  in  the  Comp- 
troller to  sell  the  lands  when  deemed  essential  to  the  safety 
of  the  bill-holders  or  public. 

The  notes  of  the  Atlas  Bank  of  New  York,  at  Clymer, 
Chatauque  Co.,  are  now  under  protest,  and  a resort  to  the 
securities  will  probably  be  necessary.  In  this  case  there  is 
one  large  mortgage  for  $65,000,  covering  several  lots  of  land 
which  might  be  sold  separately  on  a foreclosure.  It  is 
obvious  that  there  can  be  but  few  competitors  for  so  large  a 
mortgage.  It  is  not  susceptible  of  division,  and  the  conse- 
quence will  probably  be  that  the  mortgage  will  be  sacrificed 
and  the  bill-holders  injured.  If  the  Comptroller  had  the 
power  of  foreclosure,  he  could  sell  the  land  in  parcels. 
Many  would  become  competitors  for  a lot,  that  could  not  for 
the  whole  mortgage,  and  in  this  way  the  amount  to  be 
realized  from  the  property  would  be  greatly  increased  for 
the  benefit  of  the  bill-holders. 

The  only  objection  to  this  would  seem  to  be  the  delay 
occasioned  by  a foreclosure,  and  the  consequent  depreciation 
of  the  bills  in  the  market.  This  would  be  a reason  why  the 
Comptroller  should  never  resort  to  a foreclosure  instead  of 
a sale,  when  he  was  not  likely  to  realize  much  more  by  a sale 
than  by  a foreclosure.  But  there  may  be  cases,  and  I believe 
this  is  one,  in  which  the  power  to  foreclose  would  be  highly 
beneficial.  I am,  therefore,  of  the  opinion,  that  sound  policy 
requires  a discretionary  power  in  the  Comptroller,  either  to 
sell  or  foreclose  the  mortgages,  as  the  safety  of  the  bill- 
holders  may  in  his  opinion  require,  not  only  in  the  cases 


254 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


above  stated  by  me,  but  in  all  others  which  may  arise ; and 
I would  respectfully  suggest  that  a law  to  such  effect  be 
passed  as  soon  as  the  pleasure  and  convenience  of  the  Legis- 
lature will  admit. 

M.  Fillmore, 

Comptroller. 


POWERS  OF  COUNTY  JUDGES. 

Comptroller's  Office,  February  26,  1848. 
Messrs.  Wood  & Fish, 

Gentlemen  : Your  letter  of  the  23d  inst.  stating  that  you 
are  Loan  Commissioners  of  the  County  of  Monroe  and  that 
the  Governor  and  Senate  have  assumed  to  appoint  others  to 
fill  the  places  now  held  by  you  and  requesting  my  opinion 
whether  those  appointed  to  succeed  you  are  legally  author- 
ized to  do  so,  first  because  you  doubt  the  power  of  the  Gov- 
ernor and  Senate  to  make  the  appointment,  and  secondly 
because  the  bond  of  the  new  commissioners  is  approved  only 
by  the  County  Judge  instead  of  two  Judges  of  the  Common 
Pleas  as  required  by  the  3d  section  of  the  act  of  1837. 

First  then  as  to  the  power  to  appoint.  The  Act  of  April 
4th,  1837,  section  2d,  expressly  authorizes  the  Governor  and 
Senate  to  make  the  appointments.  The  new  Constitution 
(Act  1,  Sec.  17)  declares  that  such  acts  of  Legislature  of 
the  State  as  are  now  in  force  shall  be  and  continue  the  law 
of  this  State  subject,  etc.,  but  such  of  said  acts  as  are  repug- 
nant to  this  Constitution  are  hereby  abrogated.  I see  noth- 
ing in  the  act  authorizing  this  mode  of  appointment,  that  is 
repugnant  to  the  Constitution,  I therefore  think  the  appoint^ 
ment  constitutional  and  legal. 

The  next  question  is,  was  the  bond  properly  approved  by 
the  County  Judge? 

By  the  Act  to  amend  the  Judiciary  Act  passed  December 
14,  1847,  Sec.  27,  “Every  county  judge  within  the  county 
within  which  he  shall  have  been  elected  shall  have  power  and 
it  shall  be  his  duty  to  perform  all  such  duties  and  do  all  such 
acts,  when  not  holding  a County  Court  as  might  have  been 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


255 


done  or  performed,  by  the  laws  in  force  on  the  12th  of  May, 
1847,  by  the  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  or  by 
any  one  or  more  of  them  /'  etc. 

This  seems  to  confer  ample  power  upon  the  County 
Judge  to  approve  their  bond.  I am  therefore  of  opinion  that 
their  appointment  is  legal,  the  approval  of  their  bond  suffi- 
cient and  respectfully  advise  that  you  deliver  to  them  the 
books,  papers  and  money  in  your  hands,  belonging  to  the 
office. 

Respectfully  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


TO  INCREASE  THE  STAFF  IN  THE  COMPTROLLER'S  OFFICE. 

Comptroller's  Office,  March  7,  1848. 

Hon.  Wessell  S.  Smith, 

Chairman  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means, 

Sir  : On  examining  into  the  business  of  this  office,  I find 
that  portions  of  it  are  much  in  arrears,  for  want  of  sufficient 
assistance  to  do  it  promptly.  While  the  business  has  in- 
creased nearly  one  third,  no  provision  has  been  made  for  an 
increase  of  clerks  since  1840.  Believing  that  the  public 
interest  requires  that  all  the  business  in  the  Comptroller’s 
Office  should  be  done  with  promptness  and  dispatch,  and 
that  it  is  bad  economy  to  suffer  it  to  accumulate,  I beg  leave 
to  call  the  attention  of  your  committee  to  the  subject  and  to 
suggest  the  propriety  of  a permanent  increase  of  appropria- 
tions for  clerkhire  in  this  office  of  one  thousand  dollars  per 
annum. 

I also  find  that  some  preparation  was  made  for  a sale  of 
lands  for  taxes  during  the  past  year,  but  learn  that  the  force 
of  the  office  (though  clerks  worked  and  were  paid  for  extra 
hours)  was  found  insufficient  to  effect  it,  and  it  was  finally 
abandoned.  It  is  apparent  that  the  interests  of  the  State 
require  the  sale  to  be  made  as  soon  as  possible.  The  last  sale 
was  made  in  1843,  and  was  for  all  taxes  assessed  up  to  and 
including  the  year  1839.  The  State  has  therefore  advanced 


256 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


from  the  Treasury  to  the  several  counties  returning  non- 
resident lands,  the  taxes  for  1840,  1841,  1842,  1843.  1844, 
1845  and  1846,  amounting  in  all  to  more  than  $420,000.,  and 
this  amount  with  interest  can  only  be  reimbursed  in  part,  by 
sale  of  the  lands  returned.  To  effect  this  object  within  the 
present  year  will  require  the  assistance  of  two  additional 
clerks  from  six  to  nine  months  each  and  to  enable  me  to 
employ  them.  I would  recommend  that  an  appropriation  of 
twelve  hundred  dollars  be  added  to  the  supply  bill  for  that 
purpose. 

I append  hereto  the  form  of  a section  for  each  object. 

Respectfully  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore, 

Comptroller. 

The  annual  appropriation  for  clerk  hire  in  the  Comptroller's 
office,  shall  be  six  thousand  eight  hundred  dollars  in  lieu  of  the  sum 
heretofore  appropriated,  to  commence  on  the  first  day  of  April,  1848. 

The  Comptroller  is  hereby  authorized  to  employ  such  additional 
assistance  as  he  may  deem  necessary  to  bring  up  the  business  in 
arrears  in  his  office,  and  to  prepare  for  and  make  sale  of  lands 
returned  for  arrears  of  taxes;  and  twelve  hundred  dollars  or  so 
much  thereof  as  may  be  necessary  is  hereby  appropriated  to  defray 
the  expenses  of  the  same. 


PERSONALITY  BEHIND  A BANK. 

Comptroller’s  Office,  March  23,  1848. 

Dear  sir:  Yours  of  March  20th  in  relation  to  a sale  of 
your  bank  to  Mr.  Tiffany  came  duly  to  hand  and  I received 
one  from  him  on  the  same  subject  by  the  same  mail,  to  which 
I have  given  a more  full  response,  and  to  which  I beg  leave, 
to  refer  for  an  answer  to  yours. 

I am  strongly  inclined  to  think,  that  it  would  be  a fraud 
upon  the  community  to  permit  the  bank  to  proceed  in  your 
name  after  your  personal  responsibility  was  withdrawn. 
Suppose  John  Jacob  Astor  should  establish  an  individual 
bank,  issue  and  sign  his  bills  and  then  sell  out  to  John  Doe, 
would  it  not  be  a fraud  upon  the  community  to  permit  John 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER . 


257 


Doe  to  proceed  with  the  Bank  without  changing  its  name? 
Your  case  is  different,  but  I put  this  to  show,  what  might  be 
done  if  the  thing  were  permitted. 

Respectfully  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

E.  N.  Pratt,  Esq., 

Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Comptroller's  Office,  March  23,  1848. 
Lucius  F.  Tiffany,  Esq., 

Dear  sir:  Yours  of  the  20th  came  to  hand  yesterday,  in 
which  you  say  that  you  have  taken  some  steps  towards  pur- 
chasing the  interest  of  E.  N.  Pratt,  in  the  Pratt’s  Bank  of 
Buffalo ; and  you  desire  to  know 

1st,  Whether  there  would  be  any  objection  to  such  sale 
j by  me  ? 

2d,  Would  I approve  it?  and  3 would  the  Canal  Board 
i adhere  to  it  sresolution  to  give  the  Bank  one  sixth  of  the 
tolls  collected  at  Buffalo  in  1848. 

In  answer  to  these  interrogatories  I must  say  that  I am 
not  aware  that  any  objection  from  me  could  [prevent]  a 
i sale,  or  that  any  approbation  of  mine  is  at  all  necessary  to 
give  it  validity.  This  is  an  individual  Bank.  Mr.  Pratt  can 
undoubtedly  sell  all  his  reversionary  interest  in  the  stocks 
I held  by  this  department  in  trust  for  the  payment  of  the  bills 
which  he  has  issued,  and  any  other  property  that  he  deems 
a part  of  the  establishment.  But  no  sale  can  impair  the 
| right  vested  in  this  Department  to  apply  the  securities  held 
in  trust  to  the  redemption  of  the  circulating  notes — or 
; releave  1 Mr.  Pratt  from  his  personal  liability  on  every  bill 
; issued  by  him  and  every  contract  entered  into  by  him.  This 
is  not  like  an  association  under  the  general  banking  law, 
when  a man  holding  stock  may  sell  it  and  incur  no  personal 
liability. 

But  were  my  assent  necessary  I know  of  no  objection  to 
the  purchase ; and  should  not  hesitate  to  give  my  approba- 


1.  So  in  original. 


258 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


tion.  I am  not,  however,  prepared  to  say  that  I should  be 
willing  to  assent  to  the  issuing  of  bills  in  Pratt’s  name,  for 
which  he  is  not  personally  liable.  This  is  a question  which 
I must  reserve  for  future  consideration. 

As  to  the  deposit  of  tolls,  I submitted  the  question  to  the 
Canal  Board.  They  declined  giving  any  intimation  on  the 
subject.  If  Mr.  Pratt  did  not  give  the  security,  they  said 
they  should  consider  the  matter  open  and  the  tolls  to  be  dis- 
posed of  as  if  no  award  had  been  made.  There  seemed  to 
be  a strong  aversion  to  satisfying  any  negociation  1 for  the 
sale  of  the  right  to  these  deposits.  The  Board  will  not 
countanence  2 any  such  arrangement. 

I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


AMPLE  OFFICE  HOURS  FOR  A CLERK. 

Comptroller’s  Office,  April  17,  1848. 

Dear  sir:  The  Legislature  having  authorized  me  to 
employ  temporarily  two  additional  Clerks,  I am  happy  to 
offer  you  an  appointment  if  you  see  fit  to  accept  it. 

You  can  come  on  trial  for  one  month.  If  we  are  both 
pleased,  I shall  probably  want  you  from  4 to  6 months  and  I 
will  allow  you  at  the  rate  of  $600  per  year  for  the  term  you 
may  stay.  Should  you  accept  the  appointment,  please  to 
notify  me  immediately.  I wish  you  to  commence  as  soon 
as  possible.  It  is  proper  that  I should  say,  that  our  usual 
office  hours  will  be  from  breakfast  to  tea-time,  but  when 
business  presses  you  may  be  required  to  work  longer. 

Respectfully  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Edwin  R.  Reynolds,  Esq. 

1.  So  in  original. 

2.  So  in  original. 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


259 


ON  bankers'  liabilities. 

Comptroller's  Office,  Albany,  April  25,  1848. 

To  Messrs.  Charles  Clark,  N.  Wiley  & W.  H.  Robinson, 
Assessors  of  the  Village  of  Watertown. 

Gentlemen:  Just  as  I was  leaving  for  New  York  I 
received  a letter  from  Wooster  Sherman  Esq.  dated  on  the 
13th  instant,  making  some  inquiry  as  to  his  liability  for 
taxes  as  an  individual  Banker  and  on  my  return  I received 
yours  of  the  18th  making  similar  inquiries.  I should  have 
submitted  the  questions  to  the  attorney  general  but  he  is 
not  here  and  may  not  be  for  some  time  to  come.  As  I have 
not  time  to  write  two  answers  I shall  endeavor  to  embrace 
in  one,  a reply  to  all  inquiries  in  your  letter  and  Mr. 
Sherman’s. 

I know  nothing  of  the  motive  for  passing  the  act  of 
December  4,  1847,  beyond  what  appears  from  the  face  of  it, 
and  shall  construe  it  accordingly. 

The  act  (Laws  of  1847,  P-  52I>  Sec.  4)  declares  that  all 
bankers  and  banking  associations  shall  be  subject  to  taxation 
on  the  full  amount  of  actual  capital  paid  in  or  secured  to  be 
paid  in,  as  such  capital  by  them  severally  at  the  actual  market 
value  of  such  securities  to  be  estimated  by  the  Comptroller 
without  any  deduction  for  the  debts  of  such  individual 
banker  or  banking  association. 

What  is  meant  here  by  the  word  Capital?  Does  it  mean 
simply  the  securities  deposited  with  the  Comptroller,  or  does 
it  mean  to  include  also  any  fund  in  addition  thereto,  belong- 
ing to  the  association  and  appropriated  to  Banking  purposes  ? 
It  may  include  either  or  both,  but  judging  from  the  context 
I am  inclined  to  think  it  is  limited  to  that  in  the  hands  of 
the  Comptroller. 

The  Act  of  1838  nowhere  speaks  of  capital  as  connected 
with  an  individual  Banker.  He  deposits  his  security  and  is 
thereby  authorized  to  issue  his  notes  to  that  amount  to  cir- 
culate as  money.  They  are,  however,  his  own  promissory 
notes  for  which  he  is  personally  liable,  as  for  any  other  indi- 


260 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER 


vidual  debt.  He  may  be  sued  on  them  and  any  property 
which  he  hold  liable  to  execution  may  be  taken  to  pay  them. 
The  securities  deposited  with  the  Comptroller  are  entirely 
collateral,  and  are  intended  as  an  additional  security  for  the 
Billholder.1 2  But  they  constitute  all  that  can  properly  be 
called  capital  applied  to  that  object  and  are  doubtless  the 
capital  intended  to  be  taxed  by  this  law.  And  I think  it 
must  be  the  same  in  the  case  of  an  association. 

If  these  securities  consist  of  Bonds  and  mortgages  the 
Banker  or  association  is  to  be  taxed  for  them  as  so  much 
capital,  and  if  the  [ ]-  happens  to  own  the  land  also  on 

which  the  mortgage  is  given  he  may  be  taxed  for  that  also, 
as  real  estate  in  the  proper  town.  And  I do  not  think  either 
of  these  taxes  can  be  diminished  in  consequence  of  any  debt 
due  from  the  Bank  or  individual  banker.  This  may  seem  to 
be  hard  but  I think  it  is  the  expressed  will  of  the  Legisla- 
ture. 

If,  however,  the  association  owns  real  estate  not  mort- 
gaged as  security  for  its  bills,  though  such  real  estate  be 
purchased  with  and  be  deemed  in  common  parlance  a part 
of  its  capital,  I do  not  think  it  is  taxable  as  capital  under  the 
x\ct  of  1847,  but  be  taxable  as  real  estate  in  the  proper 
place. 

The  truth  is  that  the  Legislature  regard  the  securities 
filed  here,  as  forming  an  independent  subject  for  taxation. 
If  the  mortgage  were  given  by  one  man  and  held  for  bank- 
ing purposes  by  another,  it  is  quite  clear,  that  one  would  be 
taxed  for  the  land  as  owner  and  the  other  for  the  mortgage 
as  capital  and  it  can  make  no  difference  that  the  owner  of 
the  land  happens  also  to  be  the  owner  of  the  mortgage.  This 
double  taxation  occurs  in  other  cases.  If  A own  a lot  of 
land  worth  S2000  and  mortgage  it  to  B for  $2000.  A will 
be  taxed  for  the  land  as  real  estate  and  B for  the  mortgage 
as  personal  property.  This  is  manifestly  unjust  yet  it  has 
long  been  the  law.  which  taxes  a man  for  his  land  whether 
he  owes  for  it  or  not.  as  it  does  a banker  for  his  capital. 

1.  So  in  original. 

2.  Word  lacking  in  original. 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


261 


I know  of  no  way  of  reducing  the  amount  for  which  a 
banker  or  association  is  liable  to  be  taxed  but  by  a surren- 
der of  the  securities  as  specified  in  the  4th  section. 

Any  proof  that  satisfies  the  assessors  that  this  has  been 
done  would  doubtless  be  sufficient,  but  they  are  not  bound  to 
take  the  owner’s  affidavit  as  in  the  case  of  personal  property. 

I send  enclosed  a statement  of  the  securities  deposited 
here.  Their  estimated  value  here  is  as  follows: 


Black  River  Bank $97,564 

Wooster  Sherman’s  Bank 43,372 

Henry  Keeps  Bank 52,000 

Bank  of  Watertown 29,138 


All  being  estimated  at  par  except  the  latter. 
Respectfully  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore, 

Comptroller. 


TO  A DERELICT  ASSESSOR. 


Comptroller’s  Office,  Albany,  May  11,  1848. 

I O.  D.  Huntley,  Esq., 

Brice  P.  O.  Montg’y  Co. 

Sir  : In  answer  to  the  enquiries  contd  in  yours  of  the  8th 
inst.  I would  respectfully  state,  that  the  real  estate  occupied 
by  any  minister  of  the  gospel  or  priest  of  any  denomination 
and  his  personal  property  amounting  in  the  aggregate  to 
one  thousand  five  hundred  dollars  are  exempt  from  taxation, 
and  should  not  be  included  in  the  assessment  roll ; but  for  all 
property  which  he  may  possess  over  the  $1500,  and  for  all 
real  estate  which  he  may  own,  but  which  he  does  not  occupy, 
he  is  to  be  assessed.  (Revised  Statutes,  p.  388,  Sec.  4 
and  5.) 

No  law  was  passed  during  the  last  session  of  the  Legis- 
lature affecting  the  duties  of  assessors. 

Your  last  question  is  in  the  following  words:  “Is  it 
lawful  to  tax  (assess)  real  estate,  (as  is  the  custom)  for 
! one  third  its  real  value,  and  personal  for  half  its  value?” 


262 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


How  such  a custom  as  that  to  which  you  allude  can  have 
grown  up  among  a class  of  officers  sufficiently  intelligent  to 
understand  the  English  language  and  sufficiently  conscien- 
tious to  regard  the  obligations  of  an  oath,  is  to  me  incom- 
prehensible. 

Every  assessor  is  required,  before  he  enters  upon  the 
duties  of  his  office,  to  take  an  oath  “faithfully  to  discharge 
the  duties  of  his  office  according  to  the  best  of  his  ability.” 
(Constitution,  Article  12,  Sec.  1. — 1 Revised  Statutes,  p. 
345,  Sec.  13.) 

The  duties  of  assessors  in  fixing  the  values  of  taxable 
property  are  declared  by  statute  in  language  too  plain 
to  be  misunderstood,  and  too  peremptory  to  be  honestly 
evaded. 

The  statute  says  (1  Revised  Statutes,  p.  393,  Sec.  17): 
“All  real  and  personal  estate  liable  to  taxation,  the  value 
of  which  shall  not  have  been  specified  by  the  affidavit  of 
the  person  taxed,  shall  be  estimated  by  the  assessors  at  its 
full  value , as  they  would  appraise  the  same  in  payment  of  a 
just  debt  due  from  a solvent  debtor.” 

The  26th  Section  requires  that  they  should  append  to  the 
assessment  roll,  an  official  certificate  in  which  they  declare 
substantially  that  they  have  estimated  the  value  of  the 
property  mentioned  in  the  roll  as  above  required. 

These  duties  cannot  be  faithfully  and  honestly  performed 
without  an  exact  compliance  with  the  statute.  The  prop- 
erty should  be  estimated  at  its  full  value.  If  all  assessors 
discharge  this  duty  fearlessly  and  faithfully,  then  a proper 
basis  will  be  laid  for  the  just  apportionment  of  all  State 
taxes,  as  between  county  and  county,  and  of  all  county  taxes 
as  between  town  and  town,  and  of  all  city  taxes  as  between 
ward  and  ward.  But  any  departure  from  this  rule  is  calcu- 
lated to  do  injustice,  and  no  motive  of  favor  to  your  town, 
should  induce  you  for  a moment  to  depart  from  your  duty 
as  prescribed  by  law,  and  as  you  have  sworn  to  perform  it. 
It  can  be  no  excuse  for  you,  that  you  apprehend  others  may 
do  it.  The  only  true  rule  for  every  public  officer  is  to  dis- 
charge his  duty  faithfully  and  fearlessly  and  if  others  do 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


263 


not,  they  must  incur  the  blame,  whilst  he  will  stand  acquitted 
not  only  by  his  own  conscience  but  by  every  virtuous  man. 

I have  said  more  on  this  subject  in  consequence  of  your 
remark  that  this  dereliction  of  duty  has  grown  into  a cus- 
tom. Such  a custom  is  calculated  to  impair  the  morals  of 
community,  sap  the  foundations  of  civil  society  and  bring 
into  contempt  the  administration  of  the  laws.  Hoping  that 
wherever  this  custom  has  prevailed  it  may  be  corrected,  I 
remain, 

Respectfully  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore,  Compt. 


CAYUGA  INDIANS*  ANNUITY. 

Comptroller's  Office,  Albany,  June  13,  1848. 
W.  P.  Angel,  Esq., 

Dear  sir:  I have  yours  of  the  10th  in  answer  to  one 
written  by  my  Deputy  to  Dr.  Wilson  of  the  31st  ulto.  on  the 
subject  of  paying  the  annuity  to  the  Cayuga  Indians. 

It  is  not  easy  to  determine  the  duty  of  this  department  in 
reference  to  this  annuity.  It  seems  to  me,  however,  that 
certain  propositions  must  be  admitted  by  all. 

1st.  That  a treaty  between  the  State  and  a nation  of 
Indians  is  a compact  which  cannot  be  changed  by  either 
party  without  the  assent  of  the  other.  All  would  concede, 
that  the  Indians  could  not  change  it  without  the  assent  of 
the  State,  and  it  seems  to  me,  equally  clear,  that  the  State 
can  not  change  it  without  the  assent  of  the  Indians.  If 
therefore  a law  has  been  passed  by  the  State  without  the 
assent  of  the  Indians  conflicting  with  a previous  treaty 
between  the  State  and  Indians,  then  as  but  one  can  be  valid 
and  the  other  must  be  void,  I think  the  treaty  must  prevail. 

2d.  That  a treaty  made  by  the  State  with  a part  of  a 
nation  of  Indians  is  void  so  far  as  it  attempts  to  affect  the 
rights  of  the  other  part  of  the  nation,  which  never  gave  its 
assent  to  the  treaty  and  probably  such  a treaty  is  a mere 


264 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


nullity  from  the  beginning,  as  a nation  in  all  its  negotiations 
with  other  nations  is  a unit  and  from  its  very  nature  indi- 
visible. It  is  a corporation  and  its  corporate  rights  are 
blended  and  united  in  one,  and  as  they  exist  only  in  contem- 
plation of  law,  are  indivisible — the  whole  constitute  in  law 
but  one  person. 

Now  it  appears  that  several  treaties  have  been  made  with 
the  Cayugas  by  which  they  are  entitled  to  two  annuities 
from  this  State  amounting  in  all  to  $2300,  and  that  by  a 
Treaty  made  Sept.  8,  1831  (3  book  of  Treaties,  Sec’y  of 
States  Office,  page  105),  the  whole  nation  consented  and 
agreed  that  $1700  of  that  sum  should  be  paid  to  that  portion 
of  said  nation,  then  residing  at  Sandusky  and  about  to 
remove  beyond  the  Mississippi,  and  the  remaining  $600  to 
those  residing  upon  the  Seneca  Reservation  near  Buffalo. 
This  treaty  stands  unrepealed  and  unchanged,  and  is  there- 
fore obligatory  upon  me  as  the  agent  of  the  State  in  the 
payment  of  this  Annuity. 

From  what  I have  heard,  I have  no  doubt  that  the  distri- 
bution is  now  quite  unequal,  and  therefore  unjust;  and  were 
it  in  my  power  to  correct  it,  I would  cheerfully  do  so;  but 
a treaty  is  too  sacred  a thing  to  be  changed  at  the  will  of 
one  party  only  whenever  such  party  may  think  it  unjust  or 
unequal.  No  one  has  any  right  to  complain  but  the  Indians 
and  they  cannot  as  we  are  carrying  out  their  expressed  will 
by  executing  the  treaty. 

If  anything  were  wanting  to  strengthen  this  conclusion 
it  would  be  found  in  the  fact,  that  this  annuity  has  since 
the  treaty  of  Sept.  8,  1831,  been  uniformly  paid  in  pursuance 
of  that  treaty  and  that  in  July,  1846,  that  portion  of  the 
Cayugas  still  remaining  on  the  Seneca  Reservation,  a part 
of  whom  were  then  about  to  emigrate  west  of  the  Missis- 
sippi, presented  a memorial  to  the  Commissioners  of  the 
Land  Office,  claiming  only  the  $600  given  them  by  the  treaty 
of  1831,  and  then  entered  into  a new  treaty  with  the  State 
to  distribute  that  $600  equally  among  those  who  should 
remain  on  the  Seneca  Reservation  and  those  who  should 
emigrate.  (See  3 Book  of  Treaties,  p.  273  to  281.) 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


265 


But  you  say,  a similar  treaty  was  made  with  the  Onon- 
dagas  at  the  same  time,  and  that  a law  passed  in  1847  has 
been  executed  though  conflicting  with  the  treaty  as  the  law 
of  1848  conflicts  with  the  treaty  made  with  the  Cayugas.  I 
find  no  such  treaty  at  that  time  and  I apprehend  you  refer 
to  the  treaty  of  February  28,  1829.  But  I do  not  consider 
either  of  those  treaties  as  binding,  especially  in  regard  to 
the  apportionment  of  the  annuities,  as  they  show  on  their 
face  that  they  were  not  made  with  the  whole  nation  but  only 
part.  That  with  the  Cayugas  was  made  only  with  that 
portion  “residing  at  Sandusky  ” and  that  with  the  Onon- 
dagas  with  that  portion  only  “residing  at  Buffalo.”  Hence 
they  could  have  no  binding  effect  upon  the  nation  at  large, 
and  this  being  the  only  treaty  attempting  to  apportion  the 
distribution  of  the  Onondaga  annuity  and  being  void  for 
the  reason  stated,  I feel  at  liberty,  and  in  duty  bound  to 
distribute  that  annuity  according  to  the  law  of  1847. 

These  in  brief  are  my  reasons  for  the  distribution  I have 
made  in  the  two  causes,  and  for  the  decision  of  this  depart- 
ment as  to  the  mode  of  paying  and  distributing  said  an- 
nuities. 

Respectfully  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore, 

Comptroller. 


CANAL  IMPROVEMENTS  AT  BUFFALO. 

Comptroller's  Office,  Albany,  June  28,  1848. 

Hon.  O.  Allen,  Mayor  of  Buffalo , 

Dear  sir  : I have  yours  of  the  26th  and  in  reply  thereto 
am  happy  to  inform  you,  that  I rec’d  your  communication 
in  reference  to  the  Bridge  over  the  Canal  on  Prime  Street, 
and  laid  the  same  before  the  Board.  The  papers  were  re- 
ferred to  the  Canal  Commissioners  as  they  alone  by  the  Act 
of  1839  (ch.  207,  Sec.  1)  are  authorized  and  required  to 
construct  such  bridges.  But  the  Commissioners  have  had 
no  meeting  since  the  reference.  The  Board  seemed  to  think 


266 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


it  was  a matter  of  course  almost  for  the  Commissioners  to 
erect  such  bridges. 

The  Canal  Board  took  up  the  subject  of  our  improve- 
ments at  Buffalo  and  after  examining  the  subject  came  to 
the  conclusion,  that  the  Board  had  no  power  over  the  sub- 
ject, that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  Canal  Commissioners  to  go 
on  and  perform  the  work  as  fast  as  it  could  be  economically 
done,  and  Commissioner  Hinds  gave  us  to  understand  that 
he  should  immediately  put  under  contract  portions  of  the 
work  from  Hamburgh  Street  Canal  to  Big  Buffalo  Creek 
and  also  the  Erie  Basin,  leaving  that  portion  of  the  latter 
work  nearest  the  harbor  till  the  last,  with  the  view  of  obtain- 
ing a legislative  sanction  to  a change  of  the  location  there, 
so  as  to  enable  ships  more  easily  to  enter  the  basin.  I pre- 
sume he  will  advertise  immediately. 

Commissioner  Hinds  also  presented  to  the  Board  a pro- 
ject for  enlarging  the  Erie  Canal  from  Erie  Street  to  the 
Black  Rock  Harbor,  to  the  width  of  120  feet;  and  said  he 
had  already  advertised  the  letting  of  the  work  for  the  5th 
July  on  learning  from  him,  that  our  citizens  had  not  been 
consulted  in  regard  to  this,  the  Board  postponed  any  action 
on  the  subject  to  enable  me  to  write  to  Buffalo  and  see 
whether  our  citizens  had  any  objections  to  urge  to  the 
measure.  The  letting  will  be  postponed  till  the  12th  of  July. 

I write  in  great  haste  while  sitting  at  the  Board,  but  hope, 
you  will  let  me  hear  from  you  as  soon  as  possible. 

It  is  uncertain  how  long  the  Board  will  sit.  It  may  sit  a 
week.  It  may  not  two  days. 

Respectfully  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


THE  DUTY  OF  AN  INDIAN  AGENT. 

Comptroller's  Office,  Albany,  July  25,  1848. 

Sir:  The  Statutes  makes  it  your  duty,  to  portion  and 
pay  to  each  of  the  heads  of  families  of  the  St.  Regis  tribe 
of  Indians,  under  the  direction  of  the  Trustees  of  said  tribe, 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


267 


their  equal  share  of  the  Annuity,  payable  on  the  first  Tues- 
day of  August  next.  The  construction  to  be  given  to  this 
language  is  very  important,  for  if  the  agent  is  without  dis- 
cretion, and  is  bound  to  pay  the  Annuity,  as  the  caprice  or 
ill  humor  of  the  trustees  may  dictate,  it  is  apparent  that 
great  injustice  might  be  done  and  that  many  might  be  thus 
arbitrarily  excluded  from  a participation  in  the  Annuity. 
Altho’  this  construction  might  be  contended  for  with  some 
plausibility,  it  is  not  reasonable  to  suppose,  however,  that 
the  Legislature  designed  to  make  the  agent  a mere  automa- 
ton. I am  therefore  of  the  opinion,  that  in  the  distribution 
of  the  Annuity  you  should  be  governed  as  well  by  the  sober 
advice  of  the  unprejudiced  trustees,  as  others,  both  whites 
and  Indians,  who  are  known  to  be  of  good  reputation,  and 
acquainted  with  the  customs  and  usages  of  the  tribe.  And 
I wish  it  to  be  distinctly  understood,  that  you  can  take  no 
part  in  any  religious  controversy,  which  may  unfortunately 
divide  the  tribe.  Yours  respectfully, 

Millard  Fillmore, 

Wm.  A.  Wheeler,  Esq.,  Comptroller. 

Agent,  &c.,  Malone,  N.  Y. 


FORCED  SALE  OF  BUFFALO  CREEK  INDIAN  LANDS. 

Comptroller's  Office,  Albany,  Oct.  18,  1848. 

Charles  L.  Mayer,  Esq.,  Buffalo, 

Dear  sir:  I have  yours  of  the  6th  in  reference  to  the 
lands  advertised  to  be  sold  on  the  20th  of  November  next 
for  taxes,  on  the  Buffalo  Creek  Reservation,  in  which  you 
enquire, 

“1st.  For  what  taxes  are  the  said  lands  advertised  for 
sale  ?” 

An  answer  to  this  question  will  appear  by  the  enclosed 
certificate. 

“2d.  What  shall  we  do  in  the  premises  to  save  our  land 
from  being  sold  for  taxes  accrued  prior  to  our  title  to  the 
land?” 


268 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


If  the  tax  be  valid  I know  of  no  other  way  but  to  pay 
it  and  then  compel  your  grantors  to  pay  it  to  you  on  their 
covenant  aaginst  incumbrances.  As  to  the  validity  of  the 
law,  I should  not  from  the  slight  examination  which  I have 
been  able  to  give  it  be  willing  to  express  an  opinion.  I have 
however,  received  notice  from  Richard  H.  Ogden  of  New 
York  that  they  intend  to  contest  its  validity  and  that  they 
will  commence  proceedings  for  that  purpose  at  once. 
Should  they  do  so  that  may  prevent  a sale.  Should  the  sale 
proceed  I shall  be  willing  as  far  as  in  my  power  to  protect 
the  innocent  purchaser.  But  in  the  first  place  I have  no 
description  of  the  lands  yet  unsold  by  the  Company,  and  if  I 
had,  possibly  no  purchaser  would  be  willing  to  take  those 
and  pay  the  tax  and  expenses.  I cannot  therefore  give  any 
assurance  on  that  point. 

Respectfully  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


INTERESTS  OF  THE  CAYUGAS. 

Comptroller's  Office,  Albany,  N.  Y.,  Nov.  7,  1848. 

Hon.  W.  L.  Marcy,  Sec’y  of  War, 

Sir:  About  1831  a portion  of  the  Cayuga  Indians  re- 
moved west  of  the  Mississippi,  and  a stipulation  was  then 
entered  into,  between  them  and  their  brethren  here  and  the 
State,  by  which  the  annuity  due  the  nation  was  apportioned 
between  those  West  and  those  who  remained.  It  is  now 
said  by  those  here,  that  all  who  emigrated  west  are  dead, 
and  that  a census  has  recently  been  taken  by  your  depart- 
ment showing  that  fact. 

I should  esteem  it  a favor  if  you  would  give  me  any 
information  you  may  possess  on  that  subject. 

Respectfully  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore, 

Comptroller . 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


269 


A TAX  SALE  RULING. 

Comptroller's  Office,  Albany,  Nov.  22,  1848. 
Messrs.  E.  & S.  Croswell, 

Gentlemen  : I beg  permission,  through  your  paper,1  to 
state  for  the  information  of  all  interested,  that  the  Sale  of 
Land  for  Taxes  commenced  on  Monday  last,  and  will  pro- 
gress by  counties  in  alphabetical  order  until  completed.  I 
find  that  with  the  clerical  force  in  my  office,  it  is  impossible 
to  continue  to  receive  taxes  during  the  sale,  and  keep  the 
books  posted  up.  I am  therefore  compelled  to  say  that  no 
more  taxes  will  be  received  for  the  years  1840,  ’41,  ’42  and 
’44,  until  the  sale  closes,  which  will  probably  be  in  about 
four  weeks.  But  those  owing  taxes  need  have  no  appre- 
hension of  losing  their  lands  by  a sale,  as  they  can  redeem 
them  at  any  time  within  two  years  from  the  close  of  the 
sale,  without  additional  charge,  except  interest  at  ten  per 
! cent,  per  annum. 

Millard  Fillmore, 

Comptroller . 


OGDEN  COMPANY'S  SUIT  AGAINST  THE  STATE. 

Comptroller's  Office,  Albany,  Nov.  23,  1848. 

Jacob  A.  Barker,  Esq.,  Buffalo. 

Dear  sir:  I omitted  answering  your  letter  in  reference 
to  the  employment  of  counsel  by  the  County  of  Erie,  to 
defend  the  suit  commenced  by  the  Ogden  Co.  against  me  to 
avoid  the  taxes  imposed  on  the  Indian  Reservation  prior  to 
1844  till  I could  see  the  Attorney  General.  He  is  now  here 

1.  The  Albany  Argus.  The  editor’s  name  is  often  improperly  spelled, 
even  in  the  encyclopaedias,  “Crosswell.”  Edwin  Croswell  became  State  printer 
and  editor  of  the  Argus  in  1824.  For  some  thirty  years  of  his  editorial  charge 
of  that  journal,  which  he  made  a daily,  it  was  perhaps  the  chief  organ  in 
the  State  of  the  Democratic  party.  In  1840,  upon  the  accession  of  the  Whigs 
to  power,  Thurlow  Weed  succeeded  Mr.  Croswell  as  State  Printer.  Mr. 
Croswell  continued  in  journalism,  and  a potent  factor  in  New  York  State 
politics,  until  1854.  He  died  at  Princeton,  N.  J.,  June  13,  1871. 


270 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


and  has  the  papers,  and  would  be  happy  to  have  assistant 
counsel  if  the  County  will  employ  it.  The  order  to  restrain 
the  sale  is  served,  and  a hearing  is  to  be  had  here  on  the 
ist  Wednesday  of  December.  The  land  of  course  will  not 
now  be  sold.  We  shall  resist  the  motion  for  a continuous 
order  to  stay,  and  if  we  fail,  then  answer  and  defend. 

Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


IN  REPLY  TO  CRITICS. 

Albany,  January  19,  1849. 

S.  Draper,  Esq. 

Dear  sir:  I have  yours  of  the  17th  inst.  saying  that  some 
of  the  auctioneers  have  spoken  with  evident  feeling  on  the 
subject  of  my  report.  I infer  from  what  you  say,  that  they 
think  I intended  to  charge  them  with  fraud.  Certainly  it 
was  not  my  intention  to  charge  any  one  with  that  offence; 
and  to  avoid  any  unjust,  inference  against  any  individual  I 
published  the  name  of  every  auctioneer  with  the  amt.  paid 
by  them  for  the  year  ending  June  30,  1848.  You  will  per- 
ceive by  reference  to  that  statement  that  9 Houses  paid 
$94,924.71  of  the  $103,942.23,  paid  by  the  whole  State,  as 
per  memorandum  enclosed.  I may  have  been  wrong  in 
supposing  that  any  auctioneer  sold  goods  without  making 
due  return  of  duties  or  that  any  person  not  an  auctioneer 
assumed  to  sell  without  authority.  If  so  I should  deeply 
regret  it.  But  I humbly  conceive  that  no  man  who  is  con- 
scious of  having  faithfully  discharged  his  duty  as  an  auc- 
tioneer, can  have  any  just  cause  of  complaint  of  my  report. 
I say  expressly  that  it  admits  of  no  doubt  that  there  are 
high-minded  and  honorable  men  engaged  in  this  business; 
and  that  my  object  is  to  protect  these  men  by  detecting  any 
of  a different  class  or  those  unauthorized  who  defraud  the 
revenue.  That  there  were  such,  I inferred  from  the  falling 
off  of  the  revenue.  Perhaps  I did  not  make  allowance 
enough  in  considering  this  subject  for  the  exemption  of 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


271 


certain  articles  and  the  reduction  of  duties  in  1846.  But 
that  reduction  & exemption  could  only  affect  the  year  1847- 
8,  and  yet  the  revenue  has  been  declining  since  1827,  as  will 
be  seen  by  the  table  annexed  to  my  report  at  page  165  and 
the  last  ten  years  shows  a diminished  revenue  of  more  than 
half  a million  of  dollars  over  the  ten  years  preceding. 
Every  one  must  draw  his  own  inference  from  these  facts, 
and  I am  the  last  person  inclined  to  draw  an  unfavorable 
one  against 1 Gentlemen  who  have  uniformly  borne  a good 
reputation  and  have  made  fair  and  prompt  returns  to  this 
department  of  their  auction  sales.  No  such  person  need 
suppose  that  he  is  alluded  to  in  the  suspicion  thrown  out  in 
my  report,  and  so  far  from  any  intention  to  injure  such  a 
person  my  object  has  been,  to  sustain  and  protect  him.  I 
am  confident  you  could  never  have  entertained  the  jealousy 
alluded  to  in  your  letter ; and  I trust  no  other  man  will  who 
has  acted  with  conscious  integrity. 

I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


RESIGNING  HIS  OFFICE. 

Comptroller's  Office,  Albany,  January  31,  1849. 

To  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  New  York  : 

Gentlemen  : Anticipating  that  my  duty  may  soon  com- 
pel me  to  resign  the  office  which  I now  hold,  and  being 
anxious  to  avoid  any  inconvenience  which  might  result  from 
a vacancy,  I have  thought  that  the  public  interest  would  be 
best  consulted  by  a resignation  to  take  effect  at  some  future 
day,  which  should  not  only  give  time  for  the  Legislature  to 
pass  a law  for  filling  the  vacancy,  but  also  enable  it  to  ap- 
point a successor,  and  allow  him  to  reach  the  Capitol  before 
I leave.  I therefore  respectfully  resign  the  office  of  Comp- 
troller, to  take  effect  on  the  20th  day  of  February  next. 

I cannot  suffer  the  opportunity  to  pass,  without  express- 
ing to  you  my  heartfelt  thanks  for  the  courtesy  and  kind- 


1.  So  in  original. 


272 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


ness  which,  on  your  part,  have  marked  all  our  official  inter- 
course. 

I have  the  honor  to  be,  your  obedient  servant, 

Millard  Fillmore, 

Comptroller. 


TO  PROVIDE  FOR  INCREASE  OF  WORK. 

Comptroller's  Office,  Albany,  Feb.  2,  1849. 

Hon.  Jno.  L.  Lawrence, 

Chairman  of  the  Finance  Committee, 

Sir:  I believe  there  is  a bill  pending  in  the  Senate  to 
supply  deficiencies  in  the  appropriations  for  i848-’9.  I have 
just  discovered  that  the  clerk  hire  for  this  department  is 
fixed  by  law  at  $6,800  (Laws  of  1848,  ch.  313,  p.  442),  and 
that  the  appropriation  was  only  $6,000  (do.  p.  371).  But  I 
have  been  compelled  to  employ  additional  clerks  whose  ag- 
gregate salaries  amount  to  $7,300  as  will  appear  by  my 
annual  report  (p.  154).  I think  all  these  clerks  will  be 
required  for  the  year.  The  tax  sale  has  added  largely  to 
the  labors  of  the  office,  and  should  the  resolution  of  the 
assembly,  passed  some  time  since,  requiring  a report  of 
lands  sold  for  taxes,  remain  unrescinded,  there  will  be  as 
much  or  more  than  all  the  clerks  can  do  within  the  year.  I 
would  therefore  recommend  that  you  add  $1800  to  the 
appropriation  of  $1500  extra  for  clerk  hire  in  this  depart- 
ment. 

Respectfully  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore, 

Comptroller. 


A PARTING  NOTE  TO  HIS  ASSISTANTS. 

Albany,  February  20,  1849. 

Gentlemen:  Your  kind  note  of  the  19th  inst.  was 
handed  me  last  evening  at  the  moment  I was  leaving  the 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


273 


Comptroller’s  Office  for  the  last  time.  It  was  as  unexpected 
as  it  was  gratifying,  but  I can  assure  you  that  every  expres- 
sion of  respect  and  esteem  which  you  were  pleased  to  ex- 
press towards  me  is  fully  and  most  cordially  reciprocated. 
We  have  toiled  together  many  months  in  the  public  service, 
and  nothing  could  be  more  grateful  to  my  feelings  than  the 
high  appreciation  which  my  fellow  laborers  have  placed 
upon  my  services.  But  I am  bound  to  say  that  if  I am  en- 
titled to  any  credit  for  the  manner  in  which  the  duties  of 
that  arduous  office  have  been  discharged,  you  are  entitled  to 
your  full  share ; and  I am  happy  of  this  opportunity  to  bear 
my  testimony  to  the  ability  and  fidelity  with  which  you  have 
performed  every  duty  assigned  you. 

We  met  as  strangers — we  part  as  friends ; and  the  only 
regret  I feel  at  leaving  the  office  is  in  separating  from  those 
with  whom  my  intercourse  has  been  so  agreeable  and  for 
whose  future  prosperity  and  welfare  I feel  so  deep  a solici- 
tude. But,  wishing  you  all  health  and  happiness,  I reluct- 
antly bid  you  adieu,  and  subscribe  myself, 

Your  sincere  friend, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

P.  Phelps,  Esq.,  Deputy,  and  Peter  Keyser,  and  others, 
Clerks  in  the  Comptroller’s  Office. 

As  Comptroller,  Mr.  Fillmore  made  but  one  official  report 
to  the  Legislature.1  [Report  dated  Albany,  Dec.  30,  1848; 
8vo,  pp.  94.]  It  is  the  required  review  of  the  fiscal  affairs 
of  the  State,  and  treats  of  the  various  funds  under  these 
heads : General ; Canal ; Literature ; Common  School ; U.  S. 
Deposit;  and  the  following  trust  funds:  Bank;  Free  Bank 
securities;  Mariner’s  fund;  Sinking  fund  of  the  Auburn  & 
Rochester  R.  R.  Co. ; Sinking  fund  of  the  Tonawanda  R.  R. 
Co.;  Sinking  fund  of  the  Hudson  & Berkshire  R.  R.  Co.; 
Sinking  fund  of  the  Tioga  Coal,  Iron,  Mining  & Manufac- 


1.  Assembly,  January  4,  1849;  printed  Albany,  1849. 


274 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


turing  Co. ; Sinking  fund  of  the  Long  Island  R.  R.  Co. ; 
School  and  Gospel  fund  of  the  Stockbridge  Indians ; Indian 
annuities;  New  York  & Erie  R.  R.  Co.  interest  fund.  The 
report  is  particularly  full  on  banking  and  bank  funds,  sale 
of  lands  for  taxes,  and  tax  on  mutual  insurance  companies. 

In  print  and  not  difficult  of  access,  its  publication  here  in 
full  would  not  be  justified.  The  portion  here  given  is 
deemed  as  of  chief  historical  value. 


BANKING  IN  NEW  YORK  STATE 


from  mr.  fillmore's  report  as  comptroller  for  1848. 

There  are  now  two  systems  of  banking  carried  on  in  this 
State.  One  is  called  the  Safety  Fund  System,  which  was 
first  authorized  in  1829.  Every  bank  belonging  to  this  sys- 
tem has  received  a special  act  of  incorporation  from  the 
Legislature.  These  charters  were  for  a limited  period, 
generally  having  about  twenty  years  to  run.  There  are 
seventy-eight  of  these  banks  and  two  branches  now  in 
operation,  with  an  aggregate  capital  of  $29,638,860.  The 
charters  of  some  of  them  will  expire  in  each  year  until 
1866,  when  the  last  will  terminate. 

This  system  was  regulated  by  a general  law  (Laws  of 
1829,  ch.  94),  which  was  incorporated  into  every  charter, 
by  which  each  bank  was  required  to  have  all  its  capital  paid 
in  before  it  commenced  business,  and  it  was  also  required 
annually  to  contribute  one-half  of  one  per  cent,  upon  its 
capital  to  a common  fund,  deposited  with  the  State  Treas- 
urer, until  such  fund  should  amount  to  three  per  cent,  upon 
the  capital  of  each  bank,  which  fund  was  denominated  the 
“Bank  Fund,”  and  was  to  be  applied  to  the  payment  of  the 
debts  of  any  insolvent  bank  contributing  to  the  same;  and 
in  case  the  fund  was  at  any  time  diminished  by  payments 
from  it,  the  banks  were  again  required  to  make  their  annual 
contributions,  till  each  had  in  deposit  the  three  per  cent,  on 
its  capital  stock.  This  fund,  in  common  parlance,  has  been 
called  the  “Safety  Fund,”  which  has  finally  given  name  to 
the  system.  Another  feature  of  this  system  was,  that  three 
bank  commissioners  were  to  be  appointed,  with  large 
powers,  to  supervise  and  inspect  the  several  banks:  the 


275 


276 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


State,  as  representing  the  whole  people,  and  the  banks  of  a 
certain  district  which  included  the  city  banks,  and  the  banks 
of  another  district  which  included  all  the  other  country 
banks,  each  presumed  to  have  antagonistic  interests,  were 
to  be  represented  in  this  commission.  It  was  supposed  that 
each  would  be  a check  upon  the  other.  To  effect  this,  the 
Governor  and  Senate  were  to  appoint  one  commissioner,  and 
the  banks  in  the  southern  part  of  the  State  another,  and  the 
remaining  banks  a third.  Whether  this  mode  of  appoint- 
ment was  found  not  to  answer  the  expectations  of  the  orig- 
inal projectors,  or  the  dominant  party  desired  to  use  this 
power  as  a political  engine,  is  unknown  to  the  Comptroller ; 
but  the  law  was  changed  in  1837  (ch.  74),  so  as  to  give  the 
appointment  of  all  three  to  the  Governor  and  Senate. 

This,  of  course,  brought  them  within  the  vortex  of  the 
great  political  whirlpool  of  the  State;  and  the  place  was 
sought  for  and  conferred  upon  partisan  aspirants,  without 
due  regard  in  all  cases  to  their  qualifications  to  discharge 
the  delicate  trust  committed  to  them.  This  state  of  things, 
under  the  administration  of  both  the  great  political  parties 
of  the  State,  continued  until  843,  when  the  Legislature 
abolished  the  office,  and  conferred  the  power  of  examining 
these  banks  upon  this  department,  whenever  there  was 
reason  to  suspect  that  a bank  had  made  an  incorrect  report, 
or  was  in  an  unsafe  or  unsound  condition  to  do  banking 
business. 

The  Free  Bank  System,  as  it  is  styled,  was  established  in 
1838  (ch.  260).  By  this  system  every  individual  and  asso- 
ciation was  authorized  to  engage  in  the  business  of  banking, 
and  on  depositing  with  the  Comptroller  the  stocks  of  the 
United  States,  or  of  any  State  which  should  be,  or  be  made 
equal  to  a five  per  cent,  stock,  or  such  stocks,  and  bonds  and 
mortgages  to  the  same  amount  or  less,  on  improved,  pro- 
ductive, and  unincumbered  real  estate,  worth  double  the 
amount  secured  by  the  mortgage,  over  and  above  all  build- 
ings thereon,  and  bearing  interest  of  at  least  six  per  cent, 
per  annum,  the  Comptroller  was  required  to  deliver  to  such 
individual,  or  association,  an  equal  amount  of  bank  notes 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


277 


for  circulation,  duly  numbered,  registered,  and  counter- 
signed in  his  office. 

Associations  under  this  law  were  a species  of  corporation. 
They  could  contract,  sue  and  be  sued  in  the  name  of  their 
president,  and  the  shares  were  transferable  at  the  pleasure 
of  the  shareholders,  who  were  not  liable  in  their  individual 
capacity  for  the  debts  of  the  association.  But  there  was 
nothing  in  the  act  that  required  individual  bankers  to  deposit 
any  particular  amount  of  securities  before  they  commenced 
banking.  The  country  was  then  flooded  with  stocks  from 
almost  every  State,  and  the  consequence  was  that  numerous 
banks  sprung  into  existence  under  this  law.  Repudiation- 
soon  followed.  Many  States  that  did  not  repudiate,  failed 
to  meet  their  obligations,  confidence  was  impaired,  credit 
was  shaken,  and  stocks  generally  depreciated  in  the  market. 
The  consequence  was  that  many  banks  failed,  and  the  Legis- 
lature partially  retrieved  its  errors,  in  1840  (ch.  363),  by 
excluding  all  stocks  except  those  issued  by  this  State  and 
required  those  to  be,  or  to  be  made,  equal  to  a five  per  cent, 
stock. 

Finding  the  small  banks  unsafe,  the  Legislature  in  1844, 
required  individual  bankers  to  deposit  securities  to  the 
amount  of  at  least  $50,000 ; and  associations,  to  the  amount 
of  $100,000,  before  they  were  entitled  to  any  notes  for  cir- 
culation. The  stringency  of  the  money  market  in  1847, 
admonished  the  Legislature  that  the  security  of  these  banks 
was  not  sufficient;  and  in  1848,  they  required  the  stocks 
deposited,  to  be  stocks  of  this  State,  and  equal  to  a six  per 
cent,  stock ; and  the  bonds  and  mortgages  to  bear  an  interest 
of  7 per  cent,  per  annum,  and  that  they  should  not  be  for  an 
amount  exceeding  two  fifths  of  the  value  of  the  land  covered 
by  the  mortgage.  This  is  the  free  bank  system , as  it  now 
stands,  and  it  takes  its  name  from  the  fact  that  all  are  freely 
permitted  to  embark  in  it  who  comply  with  the  rules  pre- 
scribed. It  is  no  monopoly — no  exclusive  right  granted  by 
the  Legislature  to  a favored  few,  but  is  open  to  all  who  can 
give  the  requisite  security. 


278 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


Both  of  these  systems  have  been  in  operation  long  enough 
to  test  their  merits.  It  is  presumed  that  no  one  would 
advise  the  continuance  of  both.  Two  rival  systems  cannot 
exist  without  creating  jealousies  among  those  interested, 
and  adding  much  to  the  complexity  and  labor  of  this  depart- 
ment. The  time  has  come  when  the  Legislature  must  choose 
between  them.  That  both  have  defects,  no  one  can  doubt. 
That  some  of  these  defects  admit  of  a remedy,  is  equally 
clear.  Which  then  is,  or  can  be  made  the  safest  and  best 
system  under  the  Constitution  as  it  now  stands? 

In  order  to  determine  this  question  properly,  several 
things  are  to  be  taken  into  consideration,  and  the  first  is, 
What  is  the  duty  of  the  State  in  reference  to  banking?  It 
would,  doubtless,  be  desirable  to  create  banks  which  would 
be  able  to  discharge  every  obligation,  not  only  to  the  bill- 
holder,  but  to  the  depositors,  and  all  others  to  whom  it 
should  incur  any  liability.  But  this  is  impossible.  The 
safety  fund,  which  was  intended  to  provide  such  security, 
would  have  been  ample  to  redeem  all  the  circulation  of  the 
banks  which  have  failed,  but  it  has  been  exhausted  in  pay- 
ing depositors  and  other  creditors  of  the  insolvent  banks, 
and  is  now  mortgaged  for  all  it  will  probably  produce  for 
eighteen  years  to  come.  Thus  by  attempting  more  than 
could  be  accomplished,  the  Legislature  failed  to  secure  the 
bill-holder,  which  was  in  its  power,  and,  for  the  remaining 
eighteen  years  that  some  of  these  charters  have  to  run,  the 
safety  fund  yields  him  no  security.  It  is  apparent,  then, 
that  security  for  all  liabilities  can  not  be  provided,  and  the 
State  is  under  no  more  obligation  to  attempt  this  impossi- 
bility than  it  would  be  the  equally  absurd  one  of  making 
every  merchant  capable  of  meeting  all  the  obligations  he 
should  incur. 

It  is  humbly  conceived  the  duty  of  the  State  in  this  case 
begins  and  ends  with  furnishing  a good  and  safe  currency 
to  the  people.  To  furnish  this  currency,  so  far  as  it  con- 
sists of  paper  or  credit,  is  an  exclusive  privilege  granted  by 
the  State,  and  the  State  should  take  care  that  in  granting  it 
the  people  are  secured  from  imposition  and  loss.  Any  man 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


279 


may  receive  deposits,  or  discount  a note,  or  loan  money,  or 
draw  a bill  of  exchange. 

These,  it  is  admitted,  are  banking  operations.  But  they 
are  open  to  all.  Those  who  engage  in  them  enjoy  no  ex- 
clusive privilege.  But  not  so  with  those  who  are  authorized 
to  issue  bank  notes  to  circulate  as  money.  This  is  a banking 
operation  confined  to  the  few.  It  is  a prerogative  enjoyed 
exclusively  by  the  money  kings  of  the  country,  and  they 
should  not  enjoy  it  without  giving  the  most  ample  security. 
This  duty  is  justly  imposed  for  the  privilege  which  is 
granted. 

Assuming,  then,  that  the  great  object  of  legislation  on 
this  subject  is  to  provide  a sound  currency  by  giving  ample 
security  to  the  bill-holder,  the  question  is,  how  can  this  best 
be  accomplished?  It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  safety 
fund  banks  derive  much  of  their  credit  from  the  individuals 
who  were  incorporated.  By  granting  a special  charter  in 
each  case,  the  Legislature  had  in  its  power  in  some  measure 
to  control  this  matter. 

But  there  was  an  attendant  evil  that  in  the  opinion  of 
many  outweighed  the  good.  The  practice  of  granting  ex- 
clusive privileges  to  particular  individuals  invited  competi- 
tion for  these  legislative  favors.  They  were  soon  regarded 
as  a part  of  the  spoils  belonging  to  the  victorious  party,  and 
were  dealt  out  as  rewards  for  partisan  services. 

This  practice  became  so  shameless  and  corrupt  that  it 
could  be  endured  no  longer,  and  in  1838  the  Legislature 
sought  a remedy  in  the  general  banking  law.  This  was  the 
origin  of  the  free  bank  system.  Since  that  time  no  safety 
fund  bank  has  been  chartered;  and  in  1846  the  people  set 
their  seal  of  reprobation  upon  this  practice  of  granting 
special  charters  for  banks,  by  providing  in  the  new  Consti- 
tution that  “the  Legislature  should  have  no  power  to  pass 
any  act  granting  special  charter  for  banking  purposes,  but 
that  corporations  or  associations  might  be  formed  for  such 
purposes  under  general  laws.” 

Would  it  be  safe,  then,  to  provide  by  general  law  that 
voluntary  associations  or  incorporations  might  be  formed 


280 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


anywhere  and  by  any  persons  for  banking?  The  Comp- 
troller thinks  not.  Suppose  they  were  required  to  pay  in 
all  their  capital,  and  the  most  satisfactory  proof  should  be 
required  of  this  fact.  Even  this  is  no  security  to  the  bill- 
holder.  They  can  withdraw  it  at  pleasure.  It  would  only 
be  necessary  for  those  who  wished  to  practice  a fraud  upon 
the  credulity  of  the  community,  and  reap  a golden  harvest, 
to  associate  together  and  form  a bank,  pay  in  a large  capital, 
appoint  one  of  their  associates  president,  and  another 
cashier,  to  take  charge  of  it ; prove  to  this  department  these 
facts,  and  obtain  bills  for  circulation  to  an  equal  amount, 
and  then  pay  them  out  for  property  easily  transported — 
take  their  capital  and  leave  for  California,  and  in  one  week 
would  be  beyond  the  reach  of  process  or  the  power  of 
coercion. 

But  it  has  been  suggested  that  each  bank  might  be  re- 
quired to  deposit  a certain  amount,  say  ten  per  cent.,  in  the 
treasury,  to  constitute  a fund  for  the  redemption  of  its 
bills.  So  far  as  this  deposit  goes  it  may  be  safe.  It  is  on 
the  principle  of  the  free  bank  system.  But  if  the  deposit  be 
intended  for  the  redemption  of  the  bank  only  which  makes 
the  deposit,  it  is  wholly  inadequate.  It  is  no  more  than  the 
banks  under  the  old  safety  fund  system  paid  to  the  general 
fund.  Their  charters  had  twenty  years  to  run.  They  paid 
half  of  one  per  cent,  per  annum,  making  in  all  ten  per  cent. 
To  say  that  one  dollar  is  deposited  as  a security  for  the 
redemption  of  ten,  is  a mockery. 

But  it  may  be  said  that  the  bills  constitute  a common 
fund  for  the  redemption  of  the  bills  of  the  insolvent  banks 
only.  Then  as  many  which  are  solvent  will  not  want  it, 
there  will  be  enough  to  redeem  all  the  bills  of  those  which 
shall  prove  insolvent.  This  is  doubted.  This  fund,  instead 
of  being  sufficient  to  redeem  the  notes  of  all  insolvent  banks, 
would  probably  for  a time  give  just  credit  enough  to  the 
fraudulent  associations  which  would  be  formed,  to  enable 
them  to  get  their  notes  in  circulation,  and  then  by  withdraw- 
ing their  capital  the  more  effectually  defraud  the  com- 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


281 


munity.  It  is  believed  to  be  wholly  inadequate  for  the 
object  intended. 

The  Comptroller  believes  that  the  safest  way  to  make  a 
sound  paper  currency,  is  to  have  at  all  times  ample  security 
for  its  redemption  in  the  possession  of  the  State.  In  order 
to  make  this  security  ample,  it  should  not  be  only  sufficient 
in  amount,  but  should  be  of  such  a nature  that  it  may  readily 
be  converted  into  cash  without  loss.  It  is  not  enough  that 
the  security  be  ultimately  good  or  collectable;  delay  in  re- 
deeming the  circulation  causes  it  to  depreciate,  and  is  almost 
as  fatal  to  the  poor  man  who  can  not  wait,  as  ultimate  in- 
solvency. He  becomes  at  once  the  victim  of  the  broker. 

A bond  and  mortgage  may  be  good — that  is,  the  whole 
amount  secured  by  them  may  be  collectable.  But  the  bill- 
holder  can  not  wait  for  this.  They  must  be  convertible  into 
cash  by  sale,  and  if  for  any  reason  this  can  not  be  promptly 
done,  they  are  not  of  that  kind  of  security  which  should  be 
required.  All  the  experience  of  this  department  shows  that 
bonds  and  mortgages  are  not  the  best  security  for  this  pur- 
pose, and  while  better  security  can  be  had  it  is  deeply  to  be 
regretted  that  they  were  ever  received.  The  apprehension 
that  there  may  be  a defect  of  title,  that  the  lands  mortgaged 
may  be  appraised  too  high,  or  that  there  may  be  some  legal 
defense  to  a suit  of  foreclosure,  all  conspire  to  depreciate 
their  value  in  the  estimation  of  purchasers,  when  offered  for 
sale  at  auction  on  the  failure  of  a bank. 

Capitalists  are  cautious  about  purchasing,  and  the  conse- 
quence is  that  they  have  sometimes  sold  for  less  than  twenty 
per  cent,  on  the  amount  received  by  them,  and  the  average 
amount  for  which  all  have  been  sold,  for  the  last  ten  years, 
is  only  thirty-seven  and  seventy-one  hundredths  per  cent., 
while  the  average  amount  for  which  the  five  per  cent,  stocks 
of  this  State  have  sold  is  ninety-two  eighty-six  one-hun- 
dredths per  cent.,  or  ninety-two  dollars  and  eighty-six  one- 
hundredths  for  every  one  hundred  dollars  of  stock.  This 
shows  that  a six  per  cent,  stock,  such  as  is  now  required, 
would  doubtless  have  sold  at  par,  and  the  bill-holder  would 
have  received  dollar  for  dollar  for  the  circulation. 


282 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


Should  the  country  remain  at  peace,  it  can  not  be  doubted 
that  the  stocks  of  the  United  States  will  be  a safe  and  ade- 
quate security.  The  Comptroller  would  therefore  recom- 
mend that  the  law  be  so  changed  as  to  exclude  bonds  and 
mortgages  from  all  free  banks  which  shall  hereafter  com- 
mence business,  and  to  prevent  the  taking  of  any  more  from 
those  now  in  operation,  and  to  require  that  ten  per  cent,  per 
annum  of  those  now  held  as  security  be  withdrawn,  and 
their  places  supplied  by  stocks  of  this  State,  or  of  the  United 
States.  If  this  recommendation  be  adopted,  at  the  end  of 
ten  years  the  whole  security  will  be  equal  to  a six  per  cent, 
stock  of  this  State  or  of  the  United  States,  which  it  is  pre- 
sumed will  be  ample  security  for  the  redemption  of  all  bills 
in  circulation. 

Could  this  system  of  banking  be  generally  adopted  in  the 
several  States,  it  can  hardly  be  doubted  it  would  prove 
highly  beneficial.  It  would  create  a demand  for  their  own 
State  stocks.  The  interest  paid  upon  them  would  be  paid  to 
their  own  citizens.  Every  man  who  held  a bank  note,  se- 
cured by  such  stock,  would  have  a direct  interest  in  main- 
taining inviolate  the  credit  of  the  State.  The  blasting  cry  of 
“repudiation”  would  never  again  be  heard,  and  the  plighted 
faith  of  the  State,  would  be  as  sacred  as  national  honor ; and 
lastly,  it  would  give  them  a sound  and  uniform  currency. 

If,  then,  in  addition  to  this,  Congress  would  authorize 
such  notes  as  were  secured  by  stocks  of  the  United  States, 
to  be  received  for  public  dues  to  the  national  treasury,  this 
would  give  to  such  notes  a universal  credit,  co-extensive 
with  the  United  States,  and  leave  nothing  further  to  be 
desired  in  the  shape  of  a national  paper  currency.  This 
would  avoid  all  objection  to  a national  bank,  by  obviating  all 
necessity  for  one,  for  the  purpose  of  furnishing  a national 
currency.  The  National  Government  might  be  made  amply 
secure.  The  law  might  provide  that  all  bills  secured  by 
United  States  stock  should  be  registered  and  countersigned 
in  the  Treasury  Department,  as  the  notes  circulated  by  the 
banks  in  this  State  are  registered  and  countersigned  in  this 
office.  This  would  enable  every  collector,  postmaster,  or 


AS  NEW  YORK  STATE  COMPTROLLER. 


283 


other  receiver  of  public  moneys,  to  know  that  they  were 
receivable  for  public  dues. 

The  stock  of  the  United  States  by  which  their  redemption 
was  secured,  might  be  so  transferred  to  the  State  officer 
holding  the  same,  that  it  could  not  be  sold  or  transferred 
by  him  without  the  assent  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
and  in  case  of  the  failure  of  the  bank  to  redeem  its  notes,  it 
might  be  optional  with  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to 
exchange  the  notes  held  by  the  Government  for  an  equal 
amount  of  United  States  stock  held  for  their  redemption, 
or  let  it  be  sold  and  receive  the  Government’s  share  of  the 
dividends.  In  this  way  the  National  Government  would 
always  be  secure  against  loss. 

But  this  suggestion  is  foreign  from  the  chief  object  of 
this  report,  and  is  merely  thrown  out  to  invite  attention  to 
the  subject.  But  in  conclusion,  the  Comptroller  has  no  hesi- 
tation in  recommending  that  the  free  bank  system  be  modi- 
fied in  the  particulars  above  suggested,  and  that  it  be  then 
adopted  in  preference  to  the  safety  fund  system,  as  the 
banking  system  of  this  State. 

It  can  not  be  supposed  that  the  banking  under  this  system 
will  be  as  profitable  as  it  has  been  under  the  safety  fund 
system.  It  is  therefore  desirable  that  every  facility  should 
be  given  to  capitalists  who  engage  in  it  that  can  be  granted 
consistent  with  the  security  of  the  public,  and  that  no  un- 
reasonable or  unjust  system  of  taxation  should  be  adopted 
which  discriminates  invidiously  against  them;  but  persons 
engaged  in  banking  should  be  taxed  like  all  other  citizens. 


MR.  FILLMORE 


AS  VICE-PRESIDENT 


OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


FILLMORE  AS  VICE-PRESIDENT 


As  Vice-President,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  presiding  officer  of 
the  United  States  Senate.  At  the  opening  session,  March  4, 
1849,  he  addressed  the  Senate  as  follows : 

ADDRESS  TO  THE  SENATE. 

Senators  : Never  having  been  honored  with  a seat  on  this 
floor,  and  never  having  acted  as  the  presiding  officer  of  any 
legislative  body,  you  will  not  doubt  my  sincerity  when  I 
assure  you  that  I assume  the  responsible  duties  of  this  chair 
with  a conscious  want  of  experience  and  a just  appreciation 
that  I shall  often  need  your  friendly  suggestions,  and  more 
often  your  indulgent  forbearance. 

I should  indeed  feel  oppressed  and  disheartened  did  I not 
recollect  that  the  Senate  is  composed  of  eminent  statesmen, 
equally  distinguished  for  their  high  intellectual  endowments 
and  their  amenity  of  manners,  whose  persuasive  eloquence 
is  so  happily  tempered  with  habitual  courtesy  as  to  relieve 
your  presiding  officer  from  all  that  would  be  painful  in  the 
discharge  of  his  duty,  and  render  his  position  as  agreeable  as 
it  must  be  instructive. 

Thus  encouraged  and  sustained,  I enter  upon  the  duties 
assigned  me,  firmly  resolved  to  discharge  them  with  impar- 
tiality and  to  the  best  of  my  ability.  But,  I should  do  in- 
justice to  the  grateful  emotions  of  my  own  heart,  if  I did  not 
on  this  occasion  express  my  warmest  thanks  for  the  distin- 
guished honor  that  has  been  conferred  upon  me  in  being 
called  by  the  voice  of  the  nation  to  preside  over  your  delib- 
erations. 


287 


288 


FILLMORE  AS  VICE-PRESIDENT. 


It  will  not,  I trust,  be  deemed  inappropriate  to  congratu- 
late you  on  the  scene  now  passing  before  us.  I allude  to  it 
in  no  partisan  aspect,  but  as  an  ever-recurring  event  con- 
templated by  the  Constitution.  Compare  the  peaceful 
changes  of  chief  magistrate  of  this  Republic  with  the  recent 
sanguinary  revolutions  in  Europe. 

There  the  voice  of  the  people  has  only  been  heard  amid 
the  din  of  arms  and  the  horrors  of  domestic  conflicts;  but 
here  in  our  favored  land,  under  the  guidance  of  our  Consti- 
tution, the  resistless  will  of  the  nation  has  from  time  to  time 
been  peaceably  expressed  by  the  free  will  of  the  people,  and 
all  have  bowed  in  obedient  submission  to  their  decree. 

The  Administration  which  but  yesterday  wielded  the  des- 
tinies of  this  great  nation,  today  quietly  yields  up  its  power, 
and,  without  a murmur,  retires  from  the  Capital. 

I congratulate  you,  Senators,  and  I congratulate  my 
country  upon  these  oft-recurring  and  cheering  evidences  of 
our  capacity  for  self-government.  Let  us  hope  that  the 
sublime  spectacle  we  now  witness  may  be  repeated  as  often 
as  the  people  shall  desire  a change  of  rulers,  and  that  this 
venerated  Constitution  and  this  glorious  Union  may  endure 
forever. 

In  the  discharge  of  his  duties  as  Vice-President,  Mr. 
Fillmore  does  not  appear  to  have  made  any  other  formal 
address,  although  on  various  occasions  his  remarks  from 
the  chair,  especially  in  regard  to  rules  of  order,  were  of 
marked  significance.1 

i.  On  retiring  from  the  Vice-Presidency,  in  consequence  of  the  death  of 
President  Taylor,  Mr.  Fillmore  addressed  a short  letter  to  the  Senate.  This 
will  be  found  in  place  among  his  official  correspondence,  in  pages  following. 


ADDRESS  TO  THE  SENATE 


ON  THE  PRESERVATION  OF  ORDER 
IN  THAT  BODY 


On  April  3,  1850,  Vice-President  Fillmore  asked  the 
indulgence  of  the  Senate,  before  proceeding  to  the  orders  of 
the  day,  to  submit  the  following  remarks  in  relation  to  his 
own  powers  and  duty  in  preserving  order : 

On  assuming  the  responsible  duties  as  presiding  officer  of 
this  body,  I trusted  that  no  occasion  would  arise  when  it 
would  become  necessary  for  the  Chair  to  interpose  to  pre- 
serve order  in  debate.  I could  not,  however,  disguise  the 
fact,  that  by  possibility  such  a necessity  might  arise.  I there- 
fore inquired  of  some  of  the  Senators  to  know  what  had 
been  the  usage  on  this  subject,  and  was  informed  that  the 
general  practice  had  been,  since  Mr.  Calhoun  acted  as  Vice- 
President,  not  to  interfere  unless  a question  of  order  was 
made  by  some  Senator. 

I was  informed  that  that  distinguished  and  now  lamented 
person  had  declined  to  exercise  the  power  of  calling  to 
order  for  words  spoken  in  debate,  on  the  ground  that  he  had 
no  authority  to  do  so.  Some  thought  the  rule  had  been 
since  changed,  and  others  not;  but  there  still  seemed  to  be 
a difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  power.  Under  these  cir- 
cumstances, though  my  opinion  was  strongly  in  favor  of 
the  power — with  or  without  a rule  to  authorize  it — I thought 
it  most  prudent  not  hastily  to  assume  the  exercise  of  it,  but 
to  wait  until  the  course  of  events  should  show  that  it  was. 
necessary.  It  appears  to  me  that  that  time  has  now  arrived. 


289 


290 


ADDRESS  TO  THE  SENATE. 


and  that  the  Senate  should  know  my  opinion  on  this  subject, 
and  the  powers  which,  after  mature  reflection,  I think  are 
vested  in  the  Chair,  and  the  corresponding  duties  which  they 
impose.  If  I am  wrong  in  the  conclusions  at  which  I have 
arrived,  I desire  the  advice  of  the  Senate  to  correct  me.  I 
therefore  think  it  better  to  state  them  now,  when  there  is  an 
opportunity  for  a cool  and  dispassionate  examination,  rather 
than  wait  until  they  are  called  into  action  by  some  scene  of 
excitement  which  may  be  unfavorable  to  dispassionate  de- 
liberation and  advice;  for  while  I would  shrink  from  no 
responsibility  which  the  office  with  which  I am  honored 
imposes  upon  me,  I would  most  scrupulously  avoid  the 
assumption  of  any  power  not  conferred  by  the  Constitution 
and  rules  of  this  body. 

The  question,  then,  presents  itself,  “Has  the  Vice-Presi- 
dent, as  presiding  officer  of  this  body,  the  power  to  call  a 
Senator  to  order  for  words  spoken  in  debate?” 

The  6th  rule  of  the  Senate  is  in  the  following  words : 

“When  a member  shall  be  called  to  order  by  the  President,  or 
a Senator,  he  shall  sit  down;  and  every  question  of  order  shall 
be  decided  by  the  President  without  debate,  subject  to  an  appeal 
to  the  Senate;  and  the  President  may  call  for  the  sense  of  the 
Senate  on  any  question  of  order.” 

It  will  be  seen  that  this  rule  does  not  expressly  confer  the 
power  of  calling  to  order  either  upon  the  President  or  a 
Senator,  but  impliedly  admits  that  power  in  each,  and  de- 
clares the  consequences  of  such  call. 

The  constitutional  provisions  bearing  upon  this  subject 
are  very  brief.  The  first  is : 

“The  Vice-President  of  the  United  States  shall  be  President 
of  the  Senate,  but  shall  have  no  vote  unless  they  be  equally 
divided.” 

The  next  is : 

“Each  house  may  determine  the  rules  of  its  proceedings, 
punish  its  members  for  disorderly  behavior,  and,  with  the  con- 
currence of  two-thirds,  expel  a member.” 


ADDRESS  TO  THE  SENATE. 


291 


The  first  clause  which  I have  quoted  confers  no  express 
powers ; yet  the  general  powers  and  duties  of  a presiding 
officer  in  a parliamentary  body  were  well  understood  by  the 
framers  of  the  Constitution,  and  it  can  hardly  be  doubted 
that  they  intended  to  confer  upon  the  Vice-President  those 
powers,  and  require  of  him  the  performance  of  those  duties. 
But  the  power  expressly  conferred  to  make  rules  to  regu- 
late its  proceedings,  clearly  conferred  upon  the  Senate  au- 
thority to  make  rules  regulating  the  conduct  of  all  its 
members,  including  its  presiding  officer.  What,  then,  are 
we  to  understand  from  this  rule  ? 

I have  availed  myself  of  the  leisure  afforded  by  the  last 
recess  to  look  into  the  history  of  this  rule,  that  I might,  if 
possible,  gather  from  it  the  intent  of  the  Senate  in  adopting 
it.  I find  that  one  of  the  first  acts  of  this  body,  in  1789,  was 
to  appoint  a committee  to  “prepare  a system  of  rules  for 
conducting  business  in  the  Senate.” 

That  committee  reported  a number  of  rules,  which  were 
adopted,  and  among  the  rest  the  two  following: 

“16th.  When  a member  shall  be  called  to  order,  he  shall  sit 
down  until  the  President  shall  have  determined  whether  he  is  in 
order  or  not;  and  every  question  of  order  shall  be  decided  by 
the  President  without  debate;  but,  if  there  be  a doubt  in  his 
mind,  he  may  call  for  the  sense  of  the  Senate. 

“17th.  If  the  member  be  called  to  order  for  words  spoken, 
the  exceptionable  words  shall  be  immediately  taken  down  in 
writing,  that  the  President  may  be  better  enabled  to  judge  of  the 
matter.” 

These  rules  remained  the  same  until  1828;  but  in  1826 
Mr.  Calhoun,  then  Vice-President,  declared  that,  in  his 
opinion,  he  had  no  authority  to  call  a Senator  to  order  for 
words  spoken  in  debate.  In  1828  the  rules  were  referred  to 
a committee  for  revision,  and  were  reported  without  any 
amendment  to  these  rules ; but,  when  they  came  up  for  con- 
sideration in  the  Senate,  they  were  amended  so  as  to  read 
as  they  now  do,  namely : 

“6th.  When  a member  shall  be  called  to  order  by  the  Presi- 
dent or  a Senator,  he  shall  sit  down;  and  every  question  of  order 


292 


ADDRESS  TO  THE  SENATE. 


shall  be  decided  by  the  President  without  debate,  subject  to  an 
appeal  to  the  Senate;  and  the  President  may  call  for  the  sense 
of  the  Senate  on  any  question  of  order. 

“7th.  If  the  member  be  called  to  order  by  a Senator  for 
words  spoken,  the  exceptionable  words  shall  immediately  be 
taken  down  in  writing,  that  the  President  may  be  better  enabled 
to  judge  of  the  matter.” 

It  will  be  seen,  by  comparison,  that  the  proposed  rule 
expressly  recognized  the  authority  in  the  President  to  call  to 
order,  and  gave  an  appeal  from  his  decision,  which  the 
former  rules  did  not.  It  also  made  a distinction  between  a 
call  to  order  by  the  President,  and  by  a Senator,  for  words 
spoken,  by  requiring  in  the  latter  case  that  the  objectionable 
words  should  be  reduced  to  writing,  but  not  in  the  former. 
On  this  amendment  a long  and  interesting  debate  sprung 
up,  which  may  be  found  in  Gales  & Seaton’s  “Register  of 
Debates,”  vol.  4,  part  1,  pages  278  to  341 ; and  in  this 
debate,  though  Senators  differed  widely  as  to  the  power  of 
the  President  to  call  to  order  without  the  amendment,  and  as 
to  the  policy  of  adopting  it,  yet  all  seemed  to  concede  that, 
if  adopted,  he  would  have  such  power,  and  the  amendment 
was  finally  agreed  to  by  a vote  of  more  than  two  to  one; 
and  thereupon  it  is  reported  that  Mr.  Calhoun, 

“The  Vice-President  then  rose  and  said  he  took  this  oppor- 
tunity to  express  his  entire  satisfaction  with  that  portion  of  the 
amendment  giving  to  Senators  the  right  of  appeal  from  the  de- 
cision of  the  Chair,  as  it  was  not  only  according  to  strict  prin- 
ciple, but  would  relieve  the  Chair  from  a most  delicate  duty. 
As  to  the  power  conferred  upon  the  Chair , it  was  not  for  him 
to  speak;  but  he  assured  the  Senate  that  he  should  always 
endeavor  to  exercise  it  with  strict  impartiality.” 

It  appears  to  me,  then,  with  all  due  respect  to  the  opinions 
of  others,  that  this  rule  recognized  the  power  to  call  to  order 
in  the  Vice-President,  and  by  implication,  at  least,  conferred 
that  power  upon  him. 

The  next  question  is,  Does  the  possession  of  the  power 
impose  any  duty  to  exercise  it?  The  power,  it  will  be  seen, 
is  conferred  equally  upon  the  Chair  and  every  member  of 


ADDRESS  TO  THE  SENATE. 


293 


the  Senate,  and  in  precisely  the  same  language.  Is  the  duty, 
then,  more  imperative  upon  the  President  than  upon  any 
and  every  member  of  the  Senate  to  perform  the  unpleasant 
but  necessary  task  of  exercising  it?  There  is  a marked 
distinction  between  this  rule  and  the  corresponding  rule  of 
the  House  of  Representatives.  By  the  22d  rule  of  that  body, 
a member  may  call  to  order,  but  it  is  made  the  imperative 
duty  of  the  Speaker  to  do  so.  The  words  are : 

“If  any  member,  in  speaking  or  otherwise,  transgresses  the 
rules  of  the  House,  the  Speaker  shall , or  any  member  may , call 
to  order,”  etc. 

It  is  perhaps  to  be  regretted,  if  the  Senate  desires  that  its 
presiding  officer  shall  perform  this  delicate  and  ungracious 
duty,  that  its  rule  had  not  been  equally  explicit  with  that  of 
the  House.  The  reason  why  Senators  so  seldom  interfere 
by  calling  each  other  to  order  is,  doubtless,  because  they  fear 
that  their  motives  may  be  misunderstood.  They  do  not  like 
to  appear  as  volunteers  in  the  discharge  of  such  an  invidious 
duty.  The  same  feelings  must,  to  some  extent,  operate  upon 
the  Chair,  unless  his  duty  be  palpable.  But,  upon  mature 
reflection,  I have  come  to  the  conclusion,  though  the  au- 
thority be  the  same,  yet  that  the  duty  may  be  more  impera- 
tive upon  the  Chair  than  upon  a Senator;  and  that,  if  the 
painful  necessity  shall  hereafter  arise,  I shall  feel  bound  to 
discharge  my  duty  accordingly.  I shall  endeavor  to  do  it 
with  the  utmost  impartiality  and  respect.  I know  how  diffi- 
cult it  is  to  determine  what  is  and  what  is  not  in  order — 
to  restrain  improper  language,  and  yet  not  abridge  the  free- 
dom of  debate.  But  all  must  see  how  important  it  is  that 
the  first  departure  from  the  strict  rule  of  parliamentary 
decorum  should  be  checked,  as  a slight  attack,  or  even  in- 
sinuation, of  a personal  character,  often  provokes  a more 
severe  retort,  which  brings  out  a more  disorderly  reply — 
each  Senator  feeling  a justification  in  the  previous  aggres- 
sion. 

There  is,  therefore,  no  point  so  proper  to  interpose  for 
the  preservation  of  order  as  to  check  the  first  violation  of  it. 


294 


ADDRESS  TO  THE  SENATE. 


If,  in  my  anxiety  to  do  this,  I should  sometimes  make  a 
mistake,  I am  happy  to  know  that  the  Senate  has  the  remedy 
in  its  own  hands,  and  that  by  an  appeal  my  error  may  be  cor- 
rected without  injury  to  any  one.  Or  if  I have  wholly  mis- 
taken my  duty  in  this  delicate  matter,  the  action  of  the 
Senate  will  soon  convince  me  of  that  fact,  and  in  that  event 
I shall  cheerfully  leave  it  to  the  disposition  of  the  Senate. 
But  I have  an  undoubting  confidence  that,  while  I am  right, 
I shall  be  fully  sustained. 

I trust  I shall  be  pardoned  for  making  one  or  two  sug- 
gestions on  some  points  of  minor  importance.  This  body 
has  been  so  long  and  so  justly  distinguished  for  its  dignity 
and  decorum,  that  I cannot  but  apprehend  that  some  neglect 
on  my  part  renders  these  remarks  necessary.  We  all  know 
that  many  little  irregularities  may  be  tolerated  in  a small 
body,  that  would  cause  much  disorder  in  a large  one.  The 
Senate  has  increased  from  twenty-six  to  sixty  members. 
The  natural  tendency  of  the  increase  of  members  is  to  relax 
the  discipline ; so  that  when  the  strict  observance  of  rules  is 
most  essential  to  the  dignity  and  comfort  of  the  body,  it  is 
the  most  difficult  to  enforce  it. 

The  second  rule  is  a very  salutary  one,  but  perhaps  too 
stringent  to  be  always  strictly  observed  in  practice.  It  reads 
as  follows: 

“No  member  shall  speak  to  another,  or  otherwise  interrupt 
the  business  of  the  Senate,  or  read  any  newspaper,  while  the 
journals  or  public  papers  are  reading,  or  when  any  member  is 
speaking  in  any  debate.” 

Mr.  Jefferson,  in  his  “Manual”  (p.  140),  which  seems  to 
be  a code  of  common  law  for  the  regulation  of  all  parlia- 
mentary bodies  in  this  country,  says  that  no  one  is  to  disturb 
another  in  his  speech,  etc.,  nor  to  pass  between  the 
Speaker  and  the  speaking  member.  These  are  comparatively 
trifling  matters;  and  yet  the  rules  and  law  of  the  Senate 
would  seem  to  require  that  its  presiding  officer  should  see 
them  enforced.  I trust,  however,  that  it  is  only  necessary 


ADDRESS  TO  THE  SENATE. 


295 


to  call  attention  to  them,  to  insure  their  observance  by  every 
Senator. 

But  a practice  seems  to  have  grown  up  of  interrupting  a 
Senator  when  speaking  by  addressing  him  directly,  instead 
of  addressing  the  Chair,  as  required  by  the  rule. 

The  “Manual”  declares  that  it  is  a breach  of  order  for 
one  member  to  interrupt  another  while  speaking,  unless  by 
calling  him  to  order  if  he  departs  from  it.  It  seems  to  me 
that  the  case  should  be  a very  urgent  one,  indeed,  that  can 
justify  one  member  in  interrupting  another  while  speaking, 
and  that  all  would  find  it  to  their  advantage  if  this  rule 
were  more  strictly  enforced  than  it  has  been,  and  that  in  all 
cases  the  Senator  rising  to  explain  should  address  the  Chair, 
as  required  by  the  rule. 

As  presiding  officer  of  the  Senate,  I feel  that  my  duty 
consists  in  executing  its  will,  as  declared  by  its  rules  and  by 
its  practice.  If  those  rules  are  too  strict,  it  would  be  better 
to  modify  than  violate  them.  But  we  have  a common  in- 
terest and  feel  a common  pride  in  the  order  and  dignity  of 
this  body  ; and  I therefore  feel  that  I can  appeal  with  con- 
fidence to  every  Senator  to  aid  me  in  enforcing  these  salu- 
tary regulations.1 

i.  The  Senate  Journal  records  no  other  action  taken  by  the  Senate,  on  the 
above  remarks,  than  to  order  them  entered  on  the  Journal  and  printed.  It  is  mat- 
ter of  record,  however,  that  certain  disorderly  tendencies  in  the  Senate  were 
checked,  and  the  rules  more  scrupulously  observed,  in  consequence  of  Mr.  Fill- 
more’s remarks. 


MR.  FILLMORE 

AS  PRESIDENT 

OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


JULY  10,  1850,  TO  MARCH  4,  1853 


MR.  FILLMORE  AS  PRESIDENT 

OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 

JULY  10,  1850,  TO  MARCH  4,  1853 


The  Messages  and  Proclamations  of  Millard  Fillmore, 
during  his  term  as  President,  are  easy  of  access  in  print  and 
need  not  be  republished  here.  They  can  readily  be  consulted 
in  Vol.  V.  of  the  “Messages  and  Papers  of  the  Presidents,” 
compiled  by  James  D.  Richardson,  published  by  authority 
of  Congress,  1900.  The  following  calendar  of  them,  how- 
ever, will  be  found  useful  in  the  present  connection,  for  it 
indicates  the  range  and  character  of  subjects  which  came 
before  Mr.  Fillmore,  and  on  which  he  wrote,  while  he  was 
President.  Many  of  the  special  Messages  are  mere  formal 
memoranda  stating  that  reports  and  documents  are  trans- 
mitted. Even  in  those  cases,  however,  the  subject-matter 
may  be  presumed  to  have  received  more  or  less  of  study 
from  the  Executive.  On  many  of  the  matters  indicated  he 
wrote  at  length,  and  with  his  customary  clearness  and  im- 
partiality. 


299 


300 


CALENDAR  OF  MESSAGES. 


SPECIAL  MESSAGES  TO  THE  SENATE  AND 
HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES 


1850. 

July  10.  Recommending  suitable  measures  on  the  death  of  Presi- 
dent Zachary  Taylor. 

Aug.  6.  Transmitting  letters  from  the  Governor  of  Texas,  and 
discussing  the  authority  of  the  Legislature  of  that  State 
to  extend  its  civil  jurisdiction  over  unorganized  coun- 
ties on  its  northwestern  limits;  the  claim  of  Texas  to 
territory  east  of  the  Rio  Grande;  the  status  of  New 
Mexico;  and  allied  topics.  [A  long  and  important  com- 
munication.] 

8.  Supplementary  to  the  message  of  August  6th. 

Sept.  23.  Informing  Congress  that  it  was  the  wish  of  President 
Taylor’s  family  that  his  remains  be  buried  in  Kentucky. 
[The  body  of  General  Taylor  was  taken  from  Wash- 
ington to  Louisville,  Ky.,  October  25,  1850.] 

Dec.  2.  First  annual  message.  [Principal  topics  discussed:  The 

appointing  power  of  the  Executive;  construction  of  a 
ship  canal  between  the  Atlantic  and  Pacific,  through 
Nicaragua;  commerce  with  Chili;  treaty  with  the  King 
of  the  Hawaiian  Islands;  adjustment  of  import  duties; 
need  of  a mint  in  California;  need  of  opening  a line  of 
communication  between  the  Mississippi  and  the  Pacific; 
extension  of  land  laws  to  California,  Utah  and  New 
Mexico;  problems  of  the  Mexican  frontier;  reduction 
of  domestic  postage  rates ; need  of  various  internal 
improvements ; recommending  the  establishment  of  an 
agricultural  bureau.] 

13.  Regarding  the  northern  and  western  boundaries  of  Texas. 

1851. 

Dec.  2.  Second  annual  message.  [Principal  topics  discussed: 
Cuban  filibustering  operations  of  August,  1851 ; trade 
reciprocity  with  Canada;  the  mission  of  Louis  Kossuth 
and  the  case  of  the  Hungarian  prisoners  in  Turkey; 
advocating  independence  of  Hawaii;  outbreaks  on  the 
Mexican  frontier;  Tehuantepec  railroad  enterprise; 
Panama  railroad;  commerce  with  China;  the  nation’s 
finances;  relations  with  Texas;  modification  of  the 


CALENDAR  OF  MESSAGES. 


301 


1852. 

Jan.  19. 
20. 

Feb.  10. 


10. 

16. 

Mar.  1. 


4- 

26. 

Apr.  19. 


June  11. 
14. 


July  2. 


Dec.  6. 


tariff ; need  of  an  agricultural  bureau ; need  of  improve- 
ments of  harbors  of  the  Great  Lakes  and  seacoast;  pro- 
tection of  the  southwestern  frontier;  the  Arctic  expedi- 
tion of  Lieut.  DeHaven,  in  search  of  Sir  John  Franklin; 
needs  of  the  Navy;  of  the  Postoffice  and  other  Depart- 
ments ; urging  a revision  of  the  Public  Statutes  of  the 
United  States ; on  the  enforcement  of  existing  laws 
relating  to  the  return  of  fugitives  from  labor  (so-called 
“Fugitive  Slave  law”)-] 


Relative  to  payment  of  Mexican  indemnity. 

Respecting  recent  political  occurrences  in  France. 

Respecting  the  attack  on  the  United  states  steamer  Pro- 
metheus in  the  harbor  of  San  Juan  de  Nicaragua  by  the 
British  brig  of  war  Express. 

Transmitting  report  of  Thomas  U.  Walter,  architect,  for 
the  extension  of  the  Capitol. 

Relating  to  delays  in  completing  the  convention  with 
Brazil. 

Transmitting  documents  embodying  rules  and  regulations 
for  masters,  officers  and  seamen  of  United  States  ves- 
sels at  the  free  ports  of  China. 

Relating  to  erection  of  public  buildings  in  the  Territory 
of  Minnesota. 

Regarding  the  “fraudulent  abstraction”  of  papers  relating 
to  the  treaty  of  Guadaloupe  Hidalgo. 

Relating  to  the  conflict  among  the  authorities  in  the  Ter- 
ritory of  Oregon  in  regard  to  proper  construction  of 
Acts  of  Congress,  affecting  location  and  erection  of 
public  buildings. 

On  the  disorders  on  the  Rio  Grande  frontier. 

On  claims  of  Spanish  subjects  in  New  Orleans,  injured 
by  the  mob,  consequent  to  the  unlawful  invasion  of 
Cuba  in  August,  1851. 

On  the  relief  by  Congress  of  Americans  and  others  asso- 
ciated with  them,  lately  imprisoned  and  pardoned  by 
Spain. 

Third  annual  message.  [Principal  topics  discussed:  Death 
of  Daniel  Webster;  fisheries  on  the  British- American 
coasts;  affairs  of  Cuba;  treaties  and  conventions  with 
Central  and  South  American  States ; our  growing  inter- 
ests on  the  Pacific;  the  tariff;  treaties  with  Indian 


302 


CALENDAR  OF  MESSAGES. 


tribes;  removal  of  the  Seminoles;  survey  of  the  North- 
ern Iowa  boundary;  survey  of  the  Rio  Grande;  the 
embellishment  of  the  city  of  Washington ; reorganiza- 
tion of  the  Naval  Academy;  renewing  recommendations 
of  former  messages,  and  counseling  non-interference 
with  affairs  of  other  nations.] 

[The  suppressed  portion  of  this  Message,  relating  to 
slavery,  is  printed  at  the  end  of  this  list  of  Messages 
and  Proclamations.] 

i853- 

Jan.  17.  Relative  to  the  case  of  the  vessel  Amistad. 

18.  Relative  to  the  failure  of  efforts  to  induce  Florida  Indians 
to  migrate  west  of  the  Mississippi. 

Feb.  7.  Relative  to  fisheries  and  commercial  reciprocity  with  the 
British-American  provinces. 

9.  Transmitting  Lieut.  Herndon's  report  on  the  exploration 
of  the  valley  of  the  Amazon  and  its  tributaries. 

18.  Relating  to  the  interoceanic  canal  by  the  Nicaragua  route. 


SPECIAL  MESSAGES  TO  THE  SENATE 


1850. 
July  15- 
i/- 

1 7- 

20. 

23. 

30. 

Aug.  2. 
10. 

24. 
26. 


Transmitting  treaty  between  the  United  States  and  Peru. 

Relating  to  proclamation  by  the  military  officer  command- 
ing in  New  Mexico. 

Relating  to  coast  survey,  mouth  of  the  Rio  Grande  and 
vicinity. 

Transmitting  for  ratification  a convention  between  the 
United  States  and  Mexico  for  the  extradition  of  fugi- 
tives from  justice. 

Relating  to  a treaty  with  the  Wyandott  Indians. 

Relating  to  alleged  stopping  and  search  of  American  ves- 
sels on  the  high  seas  by  the  British. 

Relating  to  the  removal  of  Fort  Polk. 

Transmitting  results  of  investigations  by  Henry  R.  School- 
craft, relating  to  history  and  condition  of  Indian  tribes 
in  the  United  States. 

Relating  to  commerce  of  the  district  of  Brazos  Santiago  in 
Texas. 

Relating  to  coast  survey  at  mouth  of  the  Rio  Grande  and 
vicinity. 


CALENDAR  OF  MESSAGES . 


303 


Sept.  2. 


9- 

9- 

16. 

27. 

28. 

Dec.  12. 

17. 

30. 


1851. 
Jan.  10. 
Feb.  3. 


13- 

13- 

IS- 

15* 

19. 

25- 

26. 


Relating  to  resignation  of  Edward  C.  Anderson,  a lieu- 
tenant in  the  Navy. 

Relating  to  certain  provisions  of  the  treaties  between  the 
United  States,  China  and  the  Ottoman  Porte. 

Transmitting  a copy  of  the  constitution  of  New  Mexico, 
with  a digest  of  the  votes  for  and  against  it. 

Relating  to  nomination  of  John  Howard  Payne  as  consul 
to  Tunis. 

Transmitting  papers  relative  to  the  Hungarian  exiles. 

Relating  to  Lieut.  Edward  C.  Anderson. 

Transmitting  report  of  Secretary  of  State  on  the  African 
slave  trade. 

Relative  to  creating  additional  grades  of  commissioned 
officers  in  the  Army,  and  regarding  civil  functions  of 
Army  officers. 

Transmitting  report  of  Secretary  of  State,  and  correspond- 
ence with  the  Austrian  charge  d’affaires  regarding  the 
condition  and  prospects  of  the  Hungarian  people  during 
their  struggle  for  independence. 


Regarding  discipline  of  the  Navy. 

Transmitting  report  and  papers  relative  to  the  possessory 
rights  of  the  British  Hudson’s  Bay  Company  in  Oregon. 

Transmitting  report  of  Secretary  of  State,  and  correspond- 
ance  with  Spain  relative  to  the  claim  of  the  owners  of 
the  schooner  Amistad  for  compensation  on  account  of 
the  liberation  of  negroes  on  board  said  vessel. 

Relating  to  drafts  on  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States 
by  Mexico  on  account  of  indemnity  due  that  Govern- 
ment in  persuance  of  the  treaty  of  Guadaloupe  Hidalgo. 

Relating  to  the  British  ship  Albion,  seized  in  Oregon 
for  alleged  violation  of  revenue  laws. 

Relating  to  seizure  of  the  Albion. 

Relating  to  taxation  by  New  Grenada  on  United  States 
citizens  when  in  transitu  across  the  Isthmus  of  Panama, 
and  to  the  United  States  mail  service  at  the  Isthmus. 

Relating  to  the  forcible  resistance  to  the  execution  of  the 
laws  of  the  United  States,  in  Boston. 

Transmitting  a convention  between  the  United  States  and 
Mexico  for  the  protection  of  a transit  way  across  the 
Isthmus  of  Tehuantepec. 

Relating  to  claims  of  certain  citizens  of  Portugal. 


304 


CALENDAR  OF  MESSAGES. 


Mar. 


Dec. 


1852. 

Jan. 


Feb. 


27.  Transmitting  correspondence  relative  to  prisoners  cap- 

tured by  Spanish  authorities  at  or  near  the  island  of 
Contoy,  and  to  projected  expeditions  to  Cuba. 

28.  In  relation  to  difficulties  between  the  British  authorities 

and  San  Salvador. 

3.  Transmitting  report  of  the  Secretary  of  State  and  docu- 

ments respecting  forcible  abduction  of  any  citizen  of 
the  United  States  from  the  Territory  of  New  Mexico 
and  his  conveyance  within  the  limits  of  the  Mexican 
Republic. 

4.  Renewing  nominations  pending  before  preceding  session 

of  the  Senate. 

10.  Transmitting  report  and  correspondence  with  the  United 
States  Minister  at  Constantinople  respecting  the  libera- 
tion of  Kossuth  and  his  companions. 

12.  Submitting  a treaty  between  the  United  States  and  Costa 
Rica. 

15.  Relating  to  the  free  navigation  of  the  St.  Lawrence,  St. 
John,  and  other  rivers,  and  to  the  free  enjoyment  of  the 
British  North  American  fisheries  by  United  States  citi- 
zens. 

15.  Relating  to  the  seizure  of  the  American  steamship  Pro- 

metheus by  a British  vessel  of  war  on  the  Mosquito 
Coast. 

16.  In  regard  to  imprisonment  of  John  S.  Thrasher  at 

Havana. 

16.  On  the  subject  of  a ship  canal  between  the  Atlantic  and 
Pacific  oceans. 

3.  Nominating  Indian  commissioners. 

6.  In  relation  to  certain  donations  in  aid  of  the  reconstruc- 
tion of  the  library  of  the  Canadian  Parliament. 

22.  Regarding  claims  of  citizens  of  California  for  services 
rendered  and  for  money  and  property  furnished  in  1846 
and  1847  in  the  conquest  of  that  country. 

9.  Transmitting  a treaty  between  the  United  States  and  the 
Republic  of  Peru. 

12.  Relating  to  the  mission  to  Eastern  Asia  of  Mr.  Balistier, 

late  consul  at  Singapore. 

13.  Transmitting  treaties  with  Indian  tribes. 

16.  Transmitting  a treaty  of  commerce  and  navigation  with 
Persia. 


CALENDAR  OF  MESSAGES. 


305 


Mar.  29. 
29. 

Apr.  8. 
May  1. 

5- 


29. 


June  1. 
11. 


23- 

26. 

26. 

26. 


July  1. 


Relating  to  the  extension  of  the  Capitol. 

Relating  to  appointment  of  George  C.  Laurason  as  collec- 
tor of  customs  for  the  district  of  New  Orleans. 

Relating  to  the  relations  between  the  United  States  and 
Japan. 

Transmitting  a convention  between  the  United  States  and 
the  Free  and  Hanseatic  Republics  of  Hamburg,  Bremen 
and  Lubeck. 

Concerning  relations  between  the  United  States  and  Guate- 
mala. 

Regarding  claims  of  certain  citizens  of  Texas  against  the 
Mexican  Government. 

Transmitting  eighteen  treaties  negotiated  with  Indian 
tribes  in  California. 

Transmitting  for  ratification  a convention  between  the 
United  States  and  the  Sultan  of  Borneo. 

On  the  subject  of  the  apprehension  and  imprisonment  by 
the  Austrian  authorities  of  Rev.  Charles  L.  Brace,  an 
American  citizen. 

Transmitting  a convention  for  the  mutual  delivery  of 
criminals,  fugitives  from  justice,  in  certain  cases  between 
the  United  States  on  the  one  part  and  Prussia  and  other 
States  of  the  Germanic  Confederation  on  the  other. 

Relative  to  the  withdrawal  of  Mr.  Hiilsemann,  charge 
d’affaires  from  Austria  to  the  United  States. 

Regarding  mutual  extradition  of  fugitives  from  justice  in 
the  United  States  and  Mexico. 

Regarding  relations  between  the  United  States,  Great 
Britain,  Nicaragua  and  Costa  Rica. 

Respecting  proposed  propositions  of  the  King  of  the  Sand- 
wich Islands  to  convey  the  sovereignty  of  those  islands 
to  the  United  States. 

Relating  to  unauthorized  publication  in  public  journals 
regarding  pending  negotiations  between  the  British  Min- 
ister and  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  adjustment  of 
certain  claims  to  territory  between  Nicaragua,  Costa 
Rica  and  the  Mosquito  Indians. 

[This  publication  roused  Mr.  Fillmore  out  of  his  ac- 
customed serenity.  He  wrote  to  the  Senate:  “I  have 

caused  immediate  inquiry  to  be  made  into  the  origin  of 
this  highly  improper  publication,  and  shall  omit  no 
proper  or  legal  means  for  bringing  it  to  light.  Whether 


306 


26. 

27. 

29. 


31- 


Aug.  2. 


13. 

14. 


21. 

27. 


27. 

27. 

27. 

27. 


CALENDAR  OF  MESSAGES. 

it  shall  turn  out  to  have  been  caused  by  unfaithfulness 
or  breach  of  duty  in  any  officer  of  this  Government,  high 
or  low,  or  by  a violation  of  diplomatic  confidence,  the 
appropriate  remedy  will  be  immediately  applied,  as 
being  due  not  only  to  this  Government,  but  to  other 
Governments.  . . . An  occurrence  of  this  kind  can 
not  but  weaken  the  faith  so  desirable  to  be  preserved 
between  different  Governments  and  to  injure  the  nego- 
tiations now  pending,  and  it  merits  the  severest  repro- 
bation.”] 

Transmitting  a treaty  with  the  Chickasaw  nation  of 
Indians. 

Relating  to  the  boundary  line  between  the  United  States 
and  Mexico. 

Respecting  a right-of-way  across  the  Isthmus  of  Tehuan- 
tepec. 

Upon  the  subject  of  the  American  and  Mexican  boundary 
commission. 

Transmitting  nineteen  treaties  with  various  Indian  tribes 
of  Oregon. 

Regarding  fisheries  on  the  coasts  of  British  North  Ameri- 
can possessions. 

Regarding  relations  with  San  Salvador. 

In  regard  to  controversies  between  the  consul  of  the 
United  States  at  Acapulco  and  the  Mexican  authorities. 

In  regard  to  relations  between  the  United  States,  Nicara- 
gua and  Costa  Rica. 

Declining  to  give  information  regarding  the  alleged  propo- 
sition of  the  King  of  the  Sandwich  Islands  to  transfer 
his  sovereignty  to  the  United  States. 

Transmitting  documents  concerning  the  Lobos  Islands. 

Transmitting  documents  relating  to  service  of  Mr.  R.  M. 
Walsh  as  special  agent  of  the  United  States  in  the  island 
of  San  Domingo. 

Transmitting  report  relative  to  the  Lobos  Islands. 

Relating  to  Mr.  R.  M.  Walsh. 

Transmitting  a convention  relative  to  commerce  and  navi- 
gation between  the  United  States  and  the  Netherlands. 

Transmitting  a convention  between  the  United  States  and 
Belgium,  for  regulating  the  right  of  inheriting  and 
acquiring  property. 


CALENDAR  OF  MESSAGES. 


307 


3i. 

Dec.  7. 
8. 

1853- 

Jan.  4. 
4- 
12. 
12. 

17. 

21. 

24. 

2 7- 

Feb.  3. 
3- 
14. 

18. 


19. 

21. 


23- 

25- 

26. 

28. 

28. 


Relating  to  foreign  postal  arrangements  and  cheap  ocean 
postage. 

Transmitting  a treaty  between  the  United  States  and  Uru- 
guay. 

Relating  to  criminals,  fugitives  from  justice. 

In  regard  to  a new  British  colony  in  Central  America. 

Relating  to  Cuba. 

Relating  to  investment  of  funds  of  the  Chickasaw  Indians. 

Relating  to  the  Mexican  boundary  commission. 

Relating  to  the  imprisonment  of  the  United  States  consul 
and  other  American  citizens  in  the  castle  at  Acapulco. 

Relative  to  Central  America. 

Relative  to  the  award  of  the  Emperor  Louis  Napoleon  of 
France  in  the  case  of  the  brig  General  Armstrong. 

Relative  to  Nicaragua,  Costa  Rica,  and  the  territory 
claimed  by  the  Mosquito  Indians. 

Transmitting  a new  draft  of  the  convention  of  1850  with 
the  Swiss  Confederation. 

Relating  to  the  postal  convention  between  the  United 
States  and  Great  Britain. 

Relating  to  the  extradition  of  fugitives  from  justice — 
convention  between  the  United  States  and  Belgium. 

Transmitting  convention  between  the  United  States  and 
Great  Britain  for  the  establishment  of  international 
copyright. 

Relative  to  fisheries  on  the  coasts  of  Florida. 

Relative  to  a water  supply  for  Washington  and  George- 
town. 

In  reference  to  the  reinvestment  of  moneys  belonging  to 
the  Chickasaw  Indians. 

Transmitting  a convention  between  the  United  States 
and  Great  Britain  for  the  adjustment  of  claims  of  citi- 
zens of  those  countries. 

Transmitting  a convention  between  the  United  States  and 
the  Emperor  of  the  French. 

Relative  to  an  extraordinary  session  of  the  Senate. 

In  regard  to  fisheries  on  the  coasts  of  British  North 
American  provinces. 

Transmitting  a treaty  with  the  Apache  Indians  in  New 
Mexico. 


308 


CALENDAR  OF  MESSAGES. 


SPECIAL  MESSAGES  TO  THE  HOUSE  OF 
REPRESENTATIVES 


1850. 

July  18.  Transmitting  information  relative  to  the  British  seizure  of 
the  island  of  Tigre,  “in  the  State  of  Nicaragua” — cor- 
rected to  read,  “in  the  Gulf  of  Fonseca,  in  the  State  of 
Honduras.” 

Dec.  9.  Relative  to  incursions  of  Indians  of  the  United  States 
upon  the  population  of  the  Mexican  frontier. 


1851. 

Jan.  3.  As  to  compensation  for  extra  help  in  the  office  of  the 
Attorney  General. 

14.  As  to  relative  rank,  precedence  and  command  among  of- 
ficers of  the  Army  and  Navy. 

Mar.  1.  Transmitting  opinions  of  the  Attorneys-General. 

Dec.  23.  Relative  to  the  conclusion  of  a treaty  between  Spain, 
France  and  Great  Britain  in  respect  to  the  island  of 
Cuba. 

23.  In  regard  to  the  imprisonment,  trial  and  sentence  of  John 
S.  Thrasher  in  the  island  of  Cuba. 


1852. 
Jan.  2. 


9- 

12. 

16. 

23. 

28. 

28. 

Feb.  12. 
18. 


In  relation  to  certain  donations  in  aid  of  the  reconstruc- 
tion of  the  library  of  the  Canadian  Parliament. 

Transmitting  information  in  regard  to  the  Territory  of 
Utah. 

Relating  to  a circular  issued  by  the  Secretary  of  State  for 
the  British  Colonial  Department  relative  to  the  employ- 
ment in  the  British  West  India  colonies  of  free  blacks 
and  liberated  slaves  from  the  United  States. 

Relating  to  affairs  of  the  Territory  of  Utah. 

Relating  to  the  Mexican  indemnity. 

Relating  to  the  seizure  and  confiscation  of  the  bark 
Georgiana  of  Maine,  and  the  brig  Susan  Loud  of  Massa- 
chusetts, by  Spanish  or  Cuban  authorities. 

Relating  to  claims  of  citizens  of  the  United  States  on  the 
Government  of  Portugal. 

Relating  to  the  seizure  of  the  brig  Arve  at  Jeremie,  St. 
Domingo,  by  Haytien  authorities. 

Respecting  an  alleged  misunderstanding  between  Capt. 
Long  of  the  United  States  Navy  and  Louis  Kossuth. 


PROCLAMATIONS. 


309 


Mar.  4. 
25- 

26. 

Apr.  6. 

July  13- 
Aug.  9. 


1853. 

Jan.  19. 


24. 

27. 


Relative  to  accounts  of  Prosper  M.  Wetmore,  late  Navy 
agent  in  the  city  of  New  York. 

Transmitting  documents  relating  to  the  encouragement  of 
the  emigration  of  colored  laborers  from  the  United 
States  to  the  British  West  Indies. 

Relative  to  the  seat  of  government  of  the  Territory  of 
Oregon. 

Transmitting  documents  on  the  best  mode  of  improving 
the  navigation  of  the  Ohio  River  at  the  Falls  of  Louis- 
ville. 

Relative  to  the  policy  of  the  Government  in  regard  to  the 
island  of  Cuba. 

On  fisheries,  and  the  dispatch  of  the  U.  S.  steam  frigate 
Mississippi  to  the  fishing-grounds  on  the  coasts  of  Brit- 
ish North  America,  to  protect  the  rights  of  American 
fishermen. 

Relative  to  the  claims  on  Spain  in  the  cases  of  the  bark 
Georgiana  and  brig  Susan  Loud. 

In  reference  to  claims  of  custom-house  officers  for  addi- 
tional pay. 

In  reference  to  the  compensation  of  weighers  and  gaugers. 


PROCLAMATIONS 


1850. 

Nov.  1.  Suspending  and  discontinuing  tonnage  and  impost  duties 
on  vessels  and  goods  from  Chile,  to  continue  during 
a reciprocal  exemption  on  the  part  of  Chile,  in  regard  to 
vessels  and  goods  from  the  United  States. 

Dec.  13.  Declaring  in  full  force  an  act  of  Congress  of  Sept.  9,  1850, 
said  act  relating  to  the  northern  and  western  boundaries 
of  Texas;  stipulating  the  cession  by  Texas  to  the  United 
States  of  all  claim  to  territory  exterior  to  those  limits; 
relinquishment  of  all  claim  by  Texas  on  the  United 
States  for  liability  for  the  debt  of  Texas;  the  payment 
to  Texas  by  the  United  States  of  $10,000,000  in  stock, 
etc. 

1851. 

Feb.  18.  Calling  on  civil  and  military  officers,  and  all  citizens  in 
the  vicinity  of  Boston,  to  resist  lawless  violence  and 


310 


PROCLAMATIONS  AND  ORDERS. 


Apr.  25. 
Oct.  22. 

1853. 

Feb.  25. 
26. 

1852. 

May  17. 

June  29. 

Sept.  13. 
Oct.  25. 


help  restore  to  the  authorities  a fugitive  slave,  unlaw- 
fully taken  from  the  custody  of  officers  on  Feb.  15th 
inst. 

Warning  the  public  against  violation  of  our  laws  and 
national  obligations,  on  the  occasion  of  an  armed  inva- 
sion into  Cuba  by  foreigners  and  others  from  the  United 
States  (the  Lopez  expedition). 

Warning  the  public  against  participation  in  a military 
expedition  into  Mexico,  a country  at  peace  with  the 
United  States. 

Convening  an  extraordinary  session  of  the  Senate. 

To  make  public  a commercial  convention  between  the 
United  States  and  the  Netherlands. 


EXECUTIVE  ORDERS 

To  the  Secretary  of  War,  announcing  that  the  President 
has  authorized  Hugh  Maxwell,  collector  at  New  York, 
to  arrest  any  unlawful  expedition  that  may  attempt  to 
fit  out  in  his  district,  and  calling  for  issuance  of  proper 
instructions  to  military  officers. 

To  the  heads  of  the  several  Departments,  announcing  the 
death  of  Henry  Clay,  and  suggesting  that  the  Depart- 
ments be  closed  for  the  day. 

To  Gen.  Joseph  G.  Totten,  regarding  water  supply  for 
Washington  and  Georgetown. 

To  the  acting  Secretary  of  State,  and  heads  of  other 
Departments,  announcing  the  death  of  Daniel  Webster, 
Secretary  of  State,  eulogizing  him  and  suggesting  suit- 
able action. 


MR.  FILLMORE’S  VIEWS 


RELATING  TO  SLAVERY 


THE  SUPPRESSED  PORTION  OF  THE  THIRD 
ANNUAL  MESSAGE  TO  CONGRESS 
DECEMBER  6,  1852 


MR.  FILLMORE’S 


VIEWS  RELATING  TO  SLAVERY 


The  suppressed  portion  of  President  Fillmore’s  annual 
message  to  Congress,  on  the  6th  of  December,  1852,  relating 
to  slavery,  is  as  follows1 : 

This  is  the  last  time  that  I ever  expect  to  address  my  fel- 
low-citizens generally,  from  any  official  position.  There  is 
one  subject  vitally  affecting  the  perpetuity  of  our  institutions, 
and  the  prosperity  of  our  common  country,  upon  which,  in 
taking  my  final  leave  of  public  life,  I feel  it  my  duty  briefly 
to  express  my  sentiments.  I know  that  the  subject  is  a 
delicate  one.  I know  that  the  difference  of  sentiment — not 
to  say  conflict  of  opinion — which  pervades  the  Republic, 
forbids  me  to  hope  for  anything  like  a unanimous  concur- 
rence in  my  views ; and  prudence  might  therefore  admonish 
me  not  to  express  them.  But  I feel  that  I owe  it  to  myself 
— that  I owe  it  to  the  country  which  gave  me  birth,  and 
which  has  honored  me  with  its  highest  trusts — frankly  and 
fearlessly  to  take  my  share  of  the  responsibility  which 
naturally  attaches  to  my  position  by  placing  on  record,  now 
and  forever,  my  views  on  the  subject  of  slavery. 

1.  Here  reprinted  from  a pamphlet  without  title-page,  or  any  indication 
of  place  or  date  except  “Thomas,  typographer,”  on  the  cover,  which  fixes  it 
as  a Buffalo  imprint.  The  cover-title  is  as  follows:  “The  suppressed  portion 

of  President  Fillmore’s  Annual  Message  to  Congress,  on  the  6th  December, 
1852,  relating  to  slavery.”  Although  suppressed,  it  evidently  was  not  entirely 
withheld  from  the  public.  Newspaper  allusions  to  it  are  to  be  found,  though 
the  present  editor  has  not  seen  it  elsewhere  in  print  in  its  entirety,  nor  do 
the  authors  of  histories  embracing  the  time  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  Presidency 
appear  to  have  knowledge  of  it. 


3i3 


314 


SUPPRESSED  VIEWS  ON  SLAVERY. 


In  doing  so,  however,  I shall  feel  compelled,  from  the 
brief  space  which  can  be  devoted  to  any  one  subject,  to  con- 
fine myself  to  its  political  aspect,  leaving  the  moral  and  re- 
ligious views  of  this  great  question  to  the  casuist  and  the 
divine.  And  even  as  a political  question,  affecting  the  social 
organization,  my  views  must  necessarily  be  limited  to  the 
inquiry,  whether  its  existence  among  us  is  a blessing  or  an 
evil,  and,  if  an  evil,  whether  there  are  any  means  by  which 
the  country  may  hope  to  be  relieved  from  it.  Were  the 
question  now  for  the  first  time  presented,  whether  slavery 
should  be  introduced  into  the  Republic,  there  would,  beyond 
all  doubt,  be  an  overwhelming  majority  against  it.  But  it  is 
here.  It  was  planted  by  the  mother  country ; maintained  by 
her  laws,  and  protected  by  her  arms.  It  had  a feeble  growth 
in  the  Northern  colonies,  and  was  easily  eradicated  after 
the  Revolution;  but  its  roots  struck  deep  in  Southern  soil, 
and  its  luxuriant  strength  defied  the  storm  of  freedom  which 
swept  over  the  land  in  1776.  It  is  now  manifest  that,  if  it 
shall  be  prostrated  by  any  external  force,  it  will  bury  be- 
neath its  sturdy  trunk  and  falling  branches  the  millions  who 
have  taken  shelter  beneath  its  spreading  shade.  Let  us, 
then,  look  at  it  as  it  is — see  what  has  been  its  operation  upon 
our  social  organization  heretofore,  and  thence  infer  what 
are  to  be  its  effects  hereafter. 

In  1620  the  first  slaves  were  brought  to  the  country  which 
now  constitutes  the  United  States.  From  what  we  know  of 
the  degradation  and  suffering  of  the  native  races  of  Africa, 
it  is  hardly  to  be  doubted  that  their  condition  was  greatly 
improved  by  the  transfer.  Here  was  the  commencement  of 
African  slavery  in  this  country.  For  more  than  two  hun- 
dred and  thirty  years  it  has  formed  a part  of  our  social 
system.  It  has  “grown  with  our  growth  and  strengthened 
with  our  strength,”  and  it  has  left  among  us  as  its  fruits, 
according  to  the  computation  of  the  census  of  1850,  3,203,867 
slaves,  and  428,051  free  people  of  color — being  a fraction 
more  than  seven  slaves  to  one  free  person  of  color  through- 
out the  whole  Union.  Our  entire  population,  free  and  slave, 
was  by  the  same  census  20,191,088,  being  a fraction  more 


SUPPRESSED  VIEWS  ON  SLAVERY. 


315 


than  six  free  persons,  including  black  and  white,  to  every 
slave.  These  are  the  elements  which  now  constitute  our 
nation ; and  in  looking  into  futurity  to  see  what  such  ele- 
ments are  likely  to  produce,  the  nation  must  be  regarded 
in  its  corporate  capacity  and  be  considered  immortal.  It 
may  change  its  form  of  government,  as  it  has  done  before ; 
but  this  alone  will  not  materially  change  its  constituent  ele- 
ments. It  may  enlarge  its  dominion  by  the  addition  of  slave 
territory,  but  such  an  addition  is  likely  to  bring  with  it  more 
slaves  in  proportion  to  the  free  population  than  now  exist 
in  the  slaveholding  States,  and  would  consequently  afford 
no  relief  for  this  class  of  our  population.  The  slave  popu- 
lation may  be  scattered  over  a broader  surface,  perhaps,  or 
it  may  occupy  other  districts  than  those  which  now  confine 
it;  but  by  a law  of  its  condition,  of  which  the  operation  is 
now  apparent,  it  manifestly  must  continue  to  retire  from  its 
old  habitations  as  it  extends  toward  new  settlements.  What- 
ever changes  may  take  place,  slave  territory  is  more  likely 
to  become  free  by  the  extinction  of  slavery  where  it  now 
exists,  than  to  increase  by  the  establishment  of  it  where  it 
does  not. 

Assuming,  then,  that  slavery  hereafter  is  to  be  restricted 
to  a territory  not  greater  than  that  which  it  now  occupies, 
and  that  both  the  free  and  slave  population  will  increase  as 
fast  for  the  next  fifty  years  as  they  have  done  for  the  past 
fifty,  the  whole  population  of  the  slave  States  in  1900,  less 
than  fifty  years  hence,  will  amount  to  35,636,045 ; and  at 
the  end  of  the  next  succeeding  half  century,  1950,  it  will 
amount  to  131,425,376.  Causes  not  now  in  operation,  or  the 
effect  of  which  cannot  now  be  calculated,  may  change  this 
anticipated  result;  but  if  it  should  be  realized,  then  it  is 
necessary  to  observe  that  the  whole  area  of  the  slave  States, 
exclusive  of  Texas,  is  estimated  at  617,131  square  miles, 
and  that  of  Texas  at  237,321  square  miles,  making  an  aggre- 
gate of  slave  territory  of  854,452  square  miles.  If  the  popu- 
lation of  only  fifty  years  hence  should  be  settled  upon  this 
ag&regate  territory,  it  would  average  a fraction  less  than 
forty-two  to  each  square  mile;  and  in  1956  it  would  amount 


316 


SUPPRESSED  VIEWS  ON  SLAVERY. 


to  a fraction  less  than  154  to  each  square  mile;  whereas  the 
whole  population  of  Virginia,  black  and  white,  averages  but 
a fraction  more  than  twenty-three  to  each  square  mile ; and 
that  of  Great  Britain,  including  all  its  large  cities  and  im- 
mense manufacturing  establishments,  averages  only  two 
hundred  and  thirty- four  to  the  square  mile.  By  the  contem- 
plation of  such  a result,  it  becomes  necessary  to  inquire 
what  is  to  become  of  the  population  in  the  slave  States,  for 
it  is  clear  that  the  two  races  cannot  long  continue  to  subsist 
together.  One  hundred  years  will  not  elapse  before  a contest 
must  commence  between  them  for  the  means  of  subsistence, 
which  will  assuredly  end  in  the  destruction  of  the  weaker 
party.  It  is  only  necessary  to  look  at  the  pauperism  of 
Great  Britain  to  read  our  future  history.  With  resources 
beyond  those  of  any  other  nation,  she  sends  forth  annually 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  emigrants  to  seek  food  and  rai- 
ment in  distant  climes. 

But  this  view  of  the  case  presupposes  a continued  state 
of  peace,  or  at  least  as  much  of  that  blessing  in  proportion  as 
we  have  enjoyed  for  the  last  fifty  years.  But  a civil  war,  or 
a servile  insurrection,  or  even  a foreign  war,  may  suddenly 
change  the  whole  aspect,  and  hasten  a crisis  which  time 
alone  would  seem  to  render  inevitable.  What  effect  such 
wars  might  have  upon  the  institution  of  slavery  no  human 
sagacity  can  foresee. 

But  there  is  another  consideration  connected  with  this 
subject  which  no  friend  of  this  Union  can  look  upon  without 
anxiety  and  dread.  I allude  to  the  hostility  to  slavery  which 
is  manifested  by  some  portion  of  the  population  of  the  free 
States,  and  its  threatened  aggressions  upon  the  slave 
States,  and  the  apprehension  and  consequent  efforts  on  their 
part  to  defend  themselves  against  it.  The  number  in  the 
free  States  who  could  be  induced  to  disregard  the  guaran- 
tees of  the  Constitution,  and  attempt  the  abolition  of  slavery 
in  other  States,  is  comparatively  small.  Yet  it  is  not  to  be 
disguised  that  their  constant  agitation  has  increased  the 
prejudice  of  the  North  against  that  institution,  and  alarmed 
the  South  for  its  safety.  This  constitutes  a disturbing  ele- 


SUPPRESSED  VIEWS  ON  SLAVERY . 


317 


ment  in  the  harmonious  action  of  this  Government,  which 
naturally  increases  our  anxiety  for  the  future.  I speak  not 
of  the  merits  or  demerits  of  the  sentiment  in  which  this  agi- 
tation originates,  but  look  only  to  its  effects  upon  the  body 
politic;  and,  for  all  the  purposes  of  this  argument,  it  may 
be  conceded  that  the  great  majority  who  entertain  this  senti- 
ment are  entirely  sincere  and  honest  in  their  convictions ; 
but  this  sincerity,  so  far  from  lessening,  actually  increases 
the  danger. 

But,  independent  of  this,  the  natural  rivalry  between  the 
slave-holding  and  free  States  is  unavoidable.  It  commenced 
with  the  formation  of  the  Constitution.  At  that  time  it  was 
chiefly  a question  of  power.  The  Representatives  in  Con- 
gress were  to  be  apportioned  among  the  States  according  to 
their  population,  and  the  electors  of  President  and  Vice- 
President  in  each  were  to  be  equal  in  number  to  its  Senators 
and  Representatives.  The  slave-holding  States,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  increasing  their  representation  in  Congress  and  their 
electors  of  President  and  Vice-President,  insisted  that  their 
slaves  were  persons,  and  should  be  counted  as  such  in  appor- 
tioning the  Representatives  among  the  States ; but  the  free 
States  insisted  that  they  were  property,  liable  to  taxation, 
but  not  entitled  to  representation  in  Congress.  The  differ- 
ence was  finally  compromised,  by  providing  in  the  Constitu- 
tion that  five  slaves  should  be  equal  to  three  free  persons, 
and  then  that  the  “Representatives  and  direct  taxes  should 
be  apportioned  among  the  several  States  according  to  their 
respective  numbers.”  Thus  was  this  question  settled,  giving 
according  to  the  last  apportionment,  twenty  Representatives 
in  Congress,  and  the  same  number  of  Presidential  electors 
to  the  slave  States,  based  upon  their  slave  population.  If 
the  principle  contended  for  by  the  free  States  at  that  time 
had  been  adopted,  the  slave-holding  States  would  have  been 
denied  the  whole  representation  now  derived  from  the  enu- 
meration of  their  slaves.  If  the  principle  now  announced  by 
many  in  the  free  States,  that  slaves  are  to  be  regarded  as 
persons , had  been  adopted,  the  slave-holding  States  would 
at  the  present  time  be  entitled  to  a representation  of  thirty- 


318 


SUPPRESSED  VIEWS  ON  SLAVERY. 


one  instead  of  twenty  members,  based  upon  their  slave  popu- 
lation. Notwithstanding  the  mode  of  apportionment  finally 
determined  upon,  the  free  States  have  always  had  a majority 
of  Representatives  in  Congress,  and  a corresponding  num- 
ber of  Presidential  electors ; and  for  sixty  years  past,  until 
the  admission  of  California,  the  number  of  free  and  slave 
States  has  been  kept  equal  by  admitting  alternately  into  the 
Union  a free  and  a slave  State,  and  as  each  State  was  repre- 
sented by  two  Senators  only,  the  consequence  has  been  that 
the  Senate  has  been  equally  divided  between  the  free  and 
slave-holding  States. 

The  contest  for  supremacy  between  the  North  and  the 
South  growing  out  of  this  question,  which  was  temporarily 
settled  by  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  was  renewed  on 
the  admission  of  Missouri  as  a State,  and  was  again  com- 
promised by  admitting  her  as  a slave  State,  and  excluding 
slavery  from  certain  other  parts  of  our  territory.  Again 
{he  agitation  of  it  was  permitted  to  slumber  for  some  fifteen 
years,  when,  without  any  apparent  contest  for  political  power 
which  had  marked  its  previous  recurrence,  it  displayed  itself 
at  the  North  by  a few  fanatics  in  the  open  declaration  of  war 
against  slavery,  however  guaranteed,  accompanied  with 
demonstrations  of  a purpose  to  abolish  it  in  the  States  and 
Territories  where  it  existed.  The  South  took  the  alarm,  and 
sought  to  strengthen  itself  by  the  acquisition  of  additional 
slave  territory.  After  a long  and  fearful  struggle  it  suc- 
ceeded, by  annexing  Texas;  but  even  this  apparent  success 
brought  with  it  a war  that  resulted  in  the  acquisition  of  new 
territory  which  will  doubtless  add  more  than  enough  free 
States  to  the  Union  to  counterbalance  all  the  slave  States 
that  will  ever  be  formed  from  Texas.  These  last  acquisi- 
tions stirred  up  a sectional  controversy  between  the  North 
and  the  South  that  shook  this  Republic  to  its  centre.  But 
again  the  controversy  has  been  fortunately  compromised,  by 
admitting  California  as  a free  State  and  giving  to  the 
South  the  full  benefit  of  that  constitutional  provision  for 
the  rendition  of  fugitive  slaves,  and  by  agreeing  to  admit 
into  the  Union  any  other  new  States  formed  from  the  re- 


SUPPRESSED  VIEWS  ON  SLAVERY . 


319 


cently  acquired  territory,  with  or  without  slavery,  as  the 
people  of  each  State  shall  determine  on  its  application  for 
admission. 

We  perceive,  therefore,  that  this  element  in  our  polity 
has  been  a constant  source  of  irritation  and  controversy; 
that  every  acquisition  of  new  territory,  if  not  stimulated  by 
a desire  to  increase  the  power  of  one  section  of  the  Union 
as  against  the  other,  is  viewed  with  increasing  jealousy  by 
one  side  or  the  other.  It  is  manifest  from  all  our  past  his- 
tory that  this  agitation  is  to  be  renewed  with  increased  vio- 
lence as  often  as  any  new  State  shall  apply  for  admission 
whose  Constitution  tolerates  slavery. 

When  the  several  colonies  declared  themselves  free  and 
independent  States,  and  each  adopted  its  own  Constitution, 
it  is  clear  that  it  had  the  sole  control  over  the  question  of 
slavery  within  its  limits.  The  Union  of  the  States  was 
formed  by  the  establishment  of  a General  Government,  to 
which  certain  powers  were  given;  but  the  Federal  Consti- 
tution expressly  declared  that  “the  powers  not  delegated  to 
the  United  States  by  the  Constitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it 
to  the  States,  were  reserved  to  the  States  respectively,  or  to 
the  people.”  This  power  over  the  institution  of  slavery  in 
the  several  States  not  having  been  conferred  by  the  Consti- 
tution upon  the  United  States,  nor  prohibited  to  the  States, 
was  consequently  reserved  to  them,  and  they  alone  can  pro- 
vide for  its  abolition  whenever  they  may  deem  it  expedient 
and  proper.  Congress  has  no  power  over  the  subject  of  abo- 
lition. Yet  it  is  not  to  be  disguised  that  the  avowed  aboli- 
tionists in  the  free  States,  regardless  of  the  sacred  obliga- 
tions of  the  Constitution,  are  prepared  to  do  everything  in 
their  power  to  abolish  slavery  in  the  several  States  where  it 
exists.  Yet  so  signally  have  they  failed  to  produce  any  result 
favorable  to  their  declared  object,  that  all  their  efforts,  thus 
far,  have  only  tended  to  rivet  the  chains  of  slavery,  and  to 
deprive  the  bondman  of  many  indulgences  which,  before  the 
era  of  this  mischievous  effort,  had  been  cheerfully  accorded 
to  him  by  his  master. 


320 


SUPPRESSED  VIEWS  ON  SLAVERY. 


The  misdirected  and  pernicious  zeal  of  this  unfortunate 
sect  has  tempted  the  slave  to  abuse  his  privileges,  and  com- 
pelled his  master,  for  his  own  security,  to  abridge  them.  To 
convince  us  of  this,  it  is  only  necessary  to  recur  to  the  fact 
that  prior  to  the  commencement  of  this  political  agitation  in 
1835  for  the  abolition  of  slavery,  the  laws  of  most  of  the 
States  opposed  no  obstacle  to  the  instruction  of  slaves  in 
reading  and  writing,  nor  forbade  their  manumission  at 
pleasure.  But  now,  to  prevent  servile  insurrections,  the 
danger  of  which  is  greatly  enhanced  by  such  a degree  of 
education  as  might  render  the  slave  population  accessible  to 
the  incendiary  publications  of  abolitionists,  the  instruction  of 
the  slave  in  reading  and  writing  is,  in  several  of  the  States, 
laid  under  a severe  interdict.  And  as  a free  black  population 
has  been  found  to  contribute  to  the  same  apprehension  of  dis- 
turbance, the  power  of  manumission  has  been  circumscribed 
by  conditions  which  greatly  restrict  its  exercise.  The  several 
returns  of  the  census  which  have  been  made  during  the  last 
half  century,  accordingly  show  that  the  free  blacks  within 
the  last  ten  years  have  increased  at  a rate  less  than  eleven 
per  cent.,  while  for  the  ten  years  from  1820  to  1830  they 
increased  at  the  rate  of  more  than  thirty-six  per  cent. : and 
for  the  ten  years  from  1830  to  1840 — during  which  time  this 
abolition  movement  had  but  partially  produced  its  baneful 
effects — it  may  also  be  seen  that  the  increase  was  a fraction 
over  tw enty  per  cent. ; yet,  during  all  this  time  from  1800 
to  1850,  slavery  went  on  with  an  almost  uniform  increase, 
averaging  more  than  twenty-nine  per  cent,  for  every  ten 
years.  This  is  a most  truthful  but  sad  exhibition,  as  shown 
by  figures  and  facts,  of  the  injurious  effects  of  political 
abolition  upon  the  slave  himself,  independently  of  all  the 
injury  which  it  has  done  the  country  in  stirring  up  strife 
between  brethren  of  the  same  great  family,  and  endangering 
the  perpetuity  of  the  Union  itself. 

These  facts  warrant  the  conclusion  that  slavery  must,  in 
less  than  half  the  time  that  has  elapsed  since  its  introduc- 
tion into  this  country,  overwhelm  the  slave  States  with  its 
numbers,  unless  something  be  done  to  check  its  increase; 


SUPPRESSED  VIEWS  ON  SLAVERY . 


321 


and  that  it  will  give  birth  to  a conflict  of  races  with  all  the 
lamentable  consequences  which  must  characterize  such  a 
strife.  This  terrible  event  may  be  precipitated,  as  it  was  in 
St.  Domingo,  by  the  well-meant  but  indiscreet  and  fatal 
policy  of  foreign  interference  to  abolish  slavery.  It  must  be 
apparent  that  the  nation  is  fast  approaching  that  horrid  gulf 
the  danger  of  which  is  not  to  be  lessened — but,  on  the  con- 
trary, rendered  more  destructive — by  refusing  to  give  it  a 
timely  and  dispassionate  consideration.  The  terrific  scenes 
of  St.  Domingo  are  sooner  or  later  to  be  reenacted  here, 
unless  something  be  done  to  avert  it.  When  that  war  com- 
mences it  will  doubtless  end,  not  as  in  St.  Domingo,  in  the 
total  destruction  of  the  white,  but  in  the  utter  extermination 
of  the  black  race.  I need  not  say  that,  before  this  is  accom- 
plished, the  nation  must  wade  through  seas  of  blood,  and 
the  helpless  and  the  innocent  fall  victims  to  the  most  cruel 
of  wars — a civil  war — a war  of  races,  embittered  with  the 
ferocity  and  malignity  peculiar  to  a servile  war.  These  are 
the  impending  dangers  of  slavery  which  invoke  the  gravest 
deliberation  of  the  nation,  and  invite  the  wise  and  the  good 
of  every  section  to  inquire  and  resolve  what  is  best  to  be 
done  to  provide  against  evils  not  the  less  deserving  of  our 
attention  because  they  are  yet  remote. 

I am  satisfied  that  all  unsolicited  interference  with  slavery 
from  other  States  or  other  countries  will  but  aggravate  the 
evil.  It  is  a law  of  human  nature,  as  universal  as  the 
instincts  and  pride  of  man,  that  no  family,  municipality, 
State,  or  nation,  ever  did  or  ever  will  tolerate  the  unasked 
intervention  of  a foreign  power  in  reference  to  its  own  do- 
mestic policy.  To  attempt  it,  is  ever  regarded  as  an  indig- 
nity and  an  insult,  and  the  officious  intermeddler  is  invari- 
ably repelled  with  resentment.  Whatever,  therefore,  is  done 
to  rid  the  country  of  this  evil  must  be  done  chiefly  by  the 
slave  States  themselves.  They  must  first  appreciate  the 
danger,  indicate  the  remedy,  and  lead  the  way;  and  then 
the  free  States  and  the  General  Government  can  aid  them. 
But  all  efforts  from  the  free  States  to  force  abolition  upon 
the  slave  States,  or  to  dictate  the  mode  by  which,  or  the 


322 


SUPPRESSED  VIEWS  ON  SLAVERY. 


time  when,  it  is  to  be  accomplished,  are  worse  than  useless, 
as  they  tend  to  endanger  everything  that  secures  “life, 
liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness”  to  the  white  man,  or 
that  can  possibly  benefit  the  slave  himself. 

There  is  another  question  connected  with  this  which 
deserves  consideration,  and  that  is,  the  condition  and  pros- 
pects of  the  free  people  of  color.  It  is  not  to  be  disguised 
that  their  condition  and  their  prospects  are  alike  deplorable. 
As  they  become  dangerous  in  the  slave  States  they  will  be 
expelled  by  rigorous  enactments ; for  self-preservation 
knows  no  law  but  necessity.  Will  the  free  States  consent  to 
be  burdened  with  such  a population  that  must  necessarily 
fill  their  poor-houses  and  penitentiaries  with  the  unfortu- 
nate, the  helpless,  and  the  vicious?  It  cannot  be  expected; 
and  one  State  has  already  excluded  them  by  a constitutional 
provision.  But  even  if  they  were  admitted,  they  must  soon 
come  into  competition  for  subsistence  with  the  white  man, 
in  a climate  more  congenial  to  the  latter,  and  they  cannot 
succeed.  The  very  fact  that  their  increase,  including  those 
manumitted,  and  fugitives,  for  the  last  ten  years,  has  been 
less  than  eleven  per  cent.,  while  that  of  the  slave  population 
which  has  no  addition  by  immigration  or  otherwise  except 
the  natural  increase,  has  been  more  than  twenty-eight  per 
cent.,  would  seem  to  be  conclusive  proof  that  the  free  black 
in  this  country  is  not,  upon  the  whole,  as  well  off  as  the  slave. 
Manumission,  therefore,  without  colonization,  cannot  benefit 
the  black,  while  it  would  create  a worthless  population  that 
would  ruin  the  South,  and  could  hardly  be  endured  at  the 
North. 

Thus  having  stated  the  evil,  I am  bound  to  offer  my 
views  of  the  remedy.  This  I do  with  unfeigned  diffidence, 
and  with  a most  sincere  declaration  that  I will  cheerfully 
concur  in  any  other  constitutional  mode  of  relief  which 
Congress  may  see  fit  to  adopt.  But  after  the  most  anxious 
and  mature  consideration  of  this  perplexing  question  in  all 
its  bearings,  I confess  that  I see  no  remedy  but  by  colonizing 
the  free  blacks,  either  in  Africa  or  the  West  Indies,  or  both. 
This,  it  appears  to  me,  is  all  that  Congress  can  do.  It  can- 


SUPPRESSED  VIEWS  ON  SLAVERY. 


323 


not  abolish  slavery,  it  can  only  invite  emancipation  by  re- 
moving the  free  black  from  his  dangerous  proximity  to  the 
slave.  But  this  would,  beyond  all  question,  offer  a strong 
inducement  to  manumission,  and  would  enable  many  to 
emancipate  their  slaves  who  are  desirous  of  doing  so,  but 
are  restrained  by  the  laws  of  their  States,  which  forbid 
emancipation  unless  the  slave  be  removed  beyond  its  boun- 
daries. Such  persons  would  thus  be  enabled  to  gratify  their 
benevolent  wishes,  at  the  same  time  that  it  would  be  left 
entirely  to  the  slave-holding  States  themselves  to  determine 
when  manumission  should  be  permitted,  or  slavery  abolished. 

This  is  where  the  Constitution  has  left  this  perplexing 
subject,  and  I am  convinced  that  it  is  where  the  peace  of  the 
country  requires  that  it  should  remain.  But  the  bare  re- 
moval of  the  free  blacks  would  be  a blessing  to  them,  and 
would  relieve  the  slave  and  free  States  from  a wretched 
population,  that  must  ever  be  kept  in  a state  of  degradation 
by  the  prejudice  of  color  and  race,  whether  they  reside  in 
the  slave  or  free  States.  There  can  be  no  well-grounded 
hope  for  the  improvement  of  either  their  moral  or  social  con- 
dition, until  they  are  removed  from  a humiliating  sense  of 
inferiority  in  the  presence  of  a superior  race,  and  are  enabled 
to  feel  the  wholesome  stimulus  of  a social  equality. 

Assuming,  then,  that  colonization  is  the  true  remedy,  is 
it  practicable?  It  appears  by  the  census  of  1850  that  there 
were  428,051  free  persons  of  color  in  the  United  States; 
and  the  annual  increase  of  the  slave  population  for  the  last 
ten  years  has  averaged  71,673.  It  is  therefore  manifest, 
that  if  emigration  could  take  place  at  the  rate  of  100,000  per 
annum,  that  would  soon  remove  the  present  free  colored 
population,  and  not  only  prevent  the  increase  of  the  slave 
population,  but  constantly  diminish  it,  and  at  last  either  wipe 
it  out  entirely,  or  reduce  it  to  such  an  inconsiderable  num- 
ber that  there  would  be  no  danger  or  inconvenience  in  its 
emancipation,  when  its  place  should  be  supplied  by  free 
labor,  as  it  doubtless  would  be  eventually  by  emigration 
from  Asia,  which  has  already  commenced  in  California. 
But  to  accomplish  this,  it  must  be  a national  work;  and  I 


324 


SUPPRESSED  VIEWS  ON  SLAVERY. 


know  of  no  more  useful  purpose  to  which  a portion  of  the 
public  revenues  could  be  devoted  than  this. 

According  to  the  price  now  paid  by  the  Colonization  So- 
ciety for  transporting  emigrants  to  Liberia,  $3,000,000  will 
remove  100,000,  and  $2,000,000  will  subsist  them  for  six 
months  after  their  arrival  at  Liberia ; and  of  course  the  ex- 
pense would  be  much  less  for  those  which  should  emigrate 
to  the  West  Indies.  And  should  gold  be  discovered  in  the 
mountains  of  Africa,  as  it  has  been  in  California  and  Aus- 
tralia, of  which  there  is  every  indication  from  the  amount 
gathered  in  the  streams,  it  would  greatly  facilitate  the  pro- 
cess of  colonization. 

It  is  true  that  this  must  be  the  work  of  many  years,  not 
to  say  centuries,  for  it  can  only  progress  as  the  slave-holding 
States,  who  are  chiefly  interested,  shall  find  it  for  their  ad- 
vantage to  encourage  emancipation.  It  cannot  be  expected 
that  a social  evil  like  this,  which  has  been  accumulating  for 
more  than  two  hundred  years,  and  is  now  intertwined  with 
all  the  industrial  pursuits  of  one-half  of  the  States  of  the 
Union,  can  be  eradicated  in  a day.  Its  increase  has  been 
insensible,  and  its  decrease  should  be  so  gradual  as  to  create 
no  shock.  But  it  cannot  be  commenced  too  soon  for  the  good 
of  the  country;  for  the  rational  philanthropist  will  see  in 
its  gradual  accomplishment  the  only  sure  mode  of  relieving 
the  country  from  this  increasing  evil  without  violence  and 
bloodshed,  and  instead  of  joining  in  the  fanaticism  of  aboli- 
tion, he  will  patiently  await  its  fulfillment;  and  the  devout 
Christian,  who  has  longed  for  the  conversion  of  Africa,  and 
mourned  over  its  heathen  idolatry  and  degradation,  will  see 
in  these  Christian  slaves,  emancipated  and  returned  to  their 
own  country,  the  true  missionaries  to  Africa,  and  recognize 
in  this  whole  transaction  the  mysterious  wisdom  of  an  All- 
wise Being,  who  by  these  means  will  bring  benighted  Africa 
to  a knowledge  of  the  Gospel. 


MR.  FILLMORE’S 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS 


AS  VICE-PRESIDENT  AND  PRESIDENT 
TO  HEADS  OF  DEPARTMENTS, 
YEARS  1849  TO  1853 


ARCHIVES  EXAMINED 


The  following  letters  were  written  by  Mr.  Fillmore  while 
he  was  Vice-President  and  President,  chiefly  to  the  heads  of 
Departments.  The  sources  from  which  they  have  been 
copied  for  this  publication  are  indicated  in  small  type,  fol- 
lowing each  letter.  In  the  great  majority  of  cases,  the  orig- 
inals are  wholly  in  Mr.  Fillmore’s  handwriting. 

The  editor’s  quest  for  the  official  correspondence  of  Mr. 
Fillmore,  as  Vice-President  and  President,  was  prosecuted 
at  the  various  Departments  at  Washington  which  were  in 
existence  during  Mr.  Fillmore’s  terms  of  office;  at  the 
Library  of  Congress,  and  in  a few  other  depositories,  as 
duly  noted.  The  War  Department,  following  its  usual 
course,  refused  access  to  its  archives.  Nothing  was  found 
in  the  Patent  Office,  nor  in  the  files  of  the  Postoffice  De- 
partment. President  Fillmore’s  letters  to  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  for  the  most  part  relate  to  appointments,  are 
short  and  usually  of  a formal  routine  character.  A brief 
syllabus  of  them  is  appended,  which  it  is  believed  will  suffi- 
ciently serve  the  purpose  of  the  present  compilation. 

Numerous  other  letters  written  by  Mr.  Fillmore,  while 
Vice-President  or  President,  but  which  are  not  strictly 
official,  will  be  found  in  a succeeding  group  of  his  writings 
in  this  collection. 


326 


MR.  FILLMORE’S  LETTERS 


AS  VICE-PRESIDENT  AND  PRESIDENT  TO  HEADS 
OF  DEPARTMENTS,  1849  TO  1853 


FROM  THE  LAKES  TO  THE  OCEAN. 

Capitol,  Dec.  27,  1849. 

Dear  sir  : I have  the  honor  to  enclose  you  a letter  from 
Mr.  John  Hollister,  who  is  a highly  respectable  merchant 
and  ship-owner  of  Buffalo,  wanting  a permit  from  the 
British  Govt,  to  pass  certain  vessels  through  the  St.  Law- 
rence to  the  Ocean.  Will  you  do  me  the  favor  to  inform  me 
how  such  a permit  can  be  obtained. 

Very  respectfully, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Hon.  J.  M.  Clayton, 

Secy.  State. 

Department  of  State. 

Endorsed:  “Reed  28  Dec.  ’49,  Ansd  29th  Dec.  ’49.”  Enclosure  mentioned 
is  not  found. 


RELATIONS  WITH  THE  ARGENTINE. 

Jany.  10,  1850. 

To  the  Secy,  of  State. 

My  dear  Sir:  I have  read  and  herewith  return  Mr. 
Harris’  despatch  of  the  24th  of  Oct.  (No.  55). 

Would  it  not  be  well  to  bring  this  matter  to  the  notice  of 
the  Argentine  Minister  here,  and  intimate  to  him  very  de- 
cidedly that  we  could  not  longer  suffer  our  appeals  to  his 


327 


328 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


Government  for  justice  to  be  treated  with  silent  contempt 
or  protracted  evasion?  Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Webster  collection.  Library  of  Congress. 


CASE  OF  A MIDSHIPMAN. 

Washington,  Jany.  n,  1850. 

Sir:  I have  the  honor  to  enclose  you  two  communica- 
tions which  I have  just  received  from  Com.  [William  D.] 
Salter  in  reference  to  the  reinstatement  of  Charles  S.  Bell 
as  a midshipman  in  the  Navy. 

His  application  places  me  in  a situation  of  some  delicacy, 
as  I wish  to  oblige  him  if  I can,  but  have  doubts  about  the 
propriety  of  saying  a word  in  a case  like  the  present.  I by 
no  means  wish  to  interfere  with  the  discipline  of  the  Navy, 
even  in  the  most  remote  degree.  But  if  it  can  be  done, 
without  producing  mischief  to  the  service,  I should  be  much 
gratified  if  the  order  dismissing  Mr.  Bell  could  be  so  far 
modified  as  to  operate  only  as  a postponement  of  his  time 
for  examination,  or  in  any  other  way  short  of  his  expulsion. 

I have  no  acquaintance  with  the  young  gentleman,  and 
have  only  been  introduced  to  his  father.  But  I do  not  now 
intercede  in  favor  of  the  son  at  the  instance  of  either  of 
them. 

I have  the  honor  to  be,  Sir, 

Yrs.  respectfully,  Millard  Fillmore. 

Navy  Department. 

A statement  of  the  case  and  Commodore  Salter’s  letter  are  enclosed,  but 
the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  declined  to  reinstate  Mr.  Bell.  Mr.  Fillmore’s  letter 
is  endorsed:  “Answer,  I decline  to  reinstate  him.  Also  send  report  of  the 

Board  in  reference  to  his  case.  W.  B.  P.” 

CASE  OF  RAMON  MONTALOO. 

Washington,  Apl.  15,  1850. 

Hon.  Jno.  M.  Clayton, 

Secy,  of  State. 

Dr.  Sir:  I have  the  honor  to  enclose  you  a letter  from 
Wynkoop  Packard,  Esq.,  a respectable  lawyer  of  the  City 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


329 


of  New  York.  If  anything  can  be  done  for  the  relief  of 
his  client  I shall  be  gratified  if  you  will  take  the  proper  steps 
to  have  it  accomplished.  Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Department  of  State. 

Endorsed:  “Reed  17  April,  Answered  19th  April.” 

Wynkoop  Packard’s  client  referred  to  in  above  was  Ramon  Montaloo,  a 
Cuban  by  birth  but  a naturalized  citizen  of  the  United  States,  who  was  seized 
by  order  of  the  Captain  General  of  Cuba  when  on  the  steamship  Georgia  about 
leaving  Havana.  The  enclosure  giving  these  and  other  details  is  with  the  letter 
of  Fillmore.  Packard’s  letter  is  of  April  13th. 


ANNOUNCING  PRESIDENT  TAYLOR'S  DEATH. 

On  July  9th  Mr.  Fillmore  received  formal  notification, 
through  the  Cabinet,  of  President  Taylor’s  death.  He  re- 
plied as  follows : 

Washington,  July  9,  1850. 

Gentlemen  : I have  received  your  note  conveying  the 
melancholy  and  painful  intelligence  of  the  decease  of 
Zachary  Taylor,  late  President  of  the  United  States.  I have 
no  language  to  express  the  emotions  of  my  heart.  The 
shock  is  so  sudden  and  unexpected  that  I am  overwhelmed 
with  grief. 

I shall  avail  myself  of  the  earliest  moment  to  communi- 
cate the  sad  intelligence  to  Congress,  and  shall  appoint  a 
time  and  place  for  taking  the  oath  of  office  prescribed  to  the 
President  of  the  United  States.  You  are  requested  to  be 
present  and  witness  the  ceremony. 

Respectfully  yours,  Millard  Fillmore. 
[Addressed  to  the  Cabinet .] 


Washington,  July  10,  1850. 

Fellow-citizens  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives : 

I have  to  perform  the  melancholy  duty  of  announcing  to 
you,  that  it  has  pleased  Almighty  God  to  remove  from  this 
life  Zachary  Taylor,  late  President  of  the  United  States. 
He  deceased  last  evening,  at  the  hour  of  half  past  ten 


330 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


o’clock,  in  the  midst  of  his  family  and  surrounded  by  affec- 
tionate friends,  calmly  and  in  the  full  possession  of  all  his 
faculties.  Among  his  last  words  were  these,  which  he 
uttered  with  emphatic  distinctness : “I  have  always  done  my 
duty.  I am  ready  to  die.  My  only  regret  is  for  the  friends 
I leave  behind  me.” 

Having  announced  to  you,  fellow-citizens,  this  most 
afflicting  bereavement,  and  assuring  you  that  it  has  pene- 
trated no  heart  with  deeper  grief  than  mine,  it  remains  for 
me  to  say,  that  I propose  this  day  at  twelve  o’clock,  in  the 
Hall  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  in  the  presence  of 
both  Houses  of  Congress,  to  take  the  oath  prescribed  by  the 
Constitution,  to  enable  me  to  enter  on  the  execution  of  the 
office  which  this  event  has  devolved  on  me. 

Millard  Fillmore. 

The  foregoing  communication  to  the  Senate,  and  that  which  follows, 
addressed  to  the  members  of  both  Houses,  though  in  the  nature  of  Messages, 
do  not  appear  in  the  published  collection  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  Messages  to  Con- 
gress. Still  another  communication  from  him,  of  the  same  date,  addressed  to 
both  Houses,  regarding  the  funeral  of  Zachary  Taylor,  is  given  among  Mr. 
Fillmore’s  published  Messages,  and  will  be  found  noted  in  the  list  printed 
in  this  volume. 


OFFICIAL  MOURNING  ORDERED. 

In  consequence  of  the  death  of  the  President  of  the 
United  States,  I direct  that  the  several  Executive  Depart- 
ments be  closed  until  after  the  funeral  of  the  illustrious 
deceased,  and  that  they,  as  well  as  the  Executive  Mansion, 
be  placed  in  mourning;  and  that  the  several  officers  of  the 
Government  wear  the  usual  badge  of  mourning  for  the  term 
of  six  months.  Millard  Fillmore. 

Washington,  July  io,  1850. 


RETIRES  FROM  THE  CHAIR  OF  THE  SENATE. 

Washington,  July  10,  1850. 
To  the  Senate  of  the  United  States: 

In  consequence  of  the  lamented  death  of  Zachary  Taylor, 
late  President  of  the  United  States,  I shall  no  longer  occupy 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


331 


the  chair  of  the  Senate ; and  I have  thought  that  a formal 
communication  to  that  effect,  through  your  secretary,  might 
enable  you  the  more  promptly  to  proceed  to  the  choice  of  a 
presiding  officer. 

Millard  Fillmore. 


COMMERCIAL  TREATY  WITH  PERU. 


Millard  Fillmore,  President  of  the  United  States  of 
America, 

To  all  to  whom  these  presents  shall  come,  Greeting: 

Know  ye,  that,  for  the  purpose  of  confirming  between 
the  United  States  and  the  Republic  of  Peru  perfect  harmony 
and  good  correspondence  and  of  removing  all  grounds  of 
dissatisfaction,  I have  invested  John  M.  Clayton,  Secretary 
of  State,  with  full  power  and  authority  and  also  with  gen- 
eral and  special  command,  for  and  in  the  name  of  the  United 
States,  to  meet  and  confer  with  Senor  Don  Jose  Manuel 
Tirado,  Envoy  Extraordinary  and  Minister  Plenipotentiary 
of  that  Republic  to  the  United  States,  and  with  him  to  agree, 
treat,  consult  and  negotiate  of  and  concerning  general  com- 
merce between  the  two  Countries  and  all  matters  connected 
therewith,  and  to  conclude  and  sign  a treaty  touching  the 
premises  for  the  final  ratification  of  the  President  of  the 
United  States  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Senate  thereof. 


In  testimony  whereof,  I have  caused  the 
seal  of  the  United  States  to  be  hereunto 
affixed.  Given  under  my  hand  at  the  City 
[seal]  of  Washington,  the  thirtieth  day  of  July, 
A.  D.  1850  and  of  the  Independence  of  the 
United  States,  the  seventy-fifth. 

Millard  Fillmore. 


By  the  President, 

J.  M.  Clayton, 

Secretary  of  State. 


Clayton  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


332 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


NAVAL  SERVICE  ON  LAKE  ERIE. 

Washington,  Augt.  2,  1850. 
To  the  Secy,  of  the  Navy, 

Sir  : Surgeon  Wood  of  the  United  States  steamer  Michi- 
gan on  Lake  Erie,  called  on  me  when  I was  too  much  occu- 
pied to  attend  to  his  request  and  complained  of  an  order 
which  had  been  made  assigning  the  staterooms  of  the  vessel 
in  a different  manner  from  what  had  been  usual.  I asked 
him  to  leave  a statement  of  facts  and  I would  refer  it  to 
you  for  investigation  and  if  wrong  for  correction.  I now 
hand  his  statement  annexed. 

I have  the  honor  to  be 

Your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Navy  Department. 

Endorsement  appears  to  show  that  William  M.  Wood  was  a supernumerary 
officer  on  this  vessel  and  for  this  reason  had  no  right  to  expect  any  of  the 
regularly  attached  officers  to  surrender  his  room  to  him.  Filed  with  this  letter 
and  evidently  in  answer  to  the  Secretary’s  reply  is:  “The  President  will  thank 
the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  for  a copy  of  the  Navy  Register  and  of  the  rules 
and  regulations  for  the  Navy  and  any  other  compilation  of  laws,  etc.,  on  the 
subject.  Wed.  Augt.  7.” 


NAVY  YARD  SUPPLIES. 

[Washington]  Sept,  n,  1850. 

The  Secy,  of  the  Navy. 

Dr.  Sir:  I presume  the  enclosed  request  of  Jos.  Smith 
to  supply  the  Navy  Yard  with  water  is  correct,  but  I have 
been  unable  to  find  the  law  that  requires  my  approval ; and 
if  it  be  necessary  it  appears  to  me  that  I ought  to  know  some 
facts  on  which  to  base  it;  as  for  instance,  How  is  the  Yard 
now  supplied?  What  will  the  proposed  improvement  cost? 
Will  it  interfere  with  individual  rights,  either  by  depriving 
them  of  the  water  or  carrying  the  pipes  through  their 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


333 


lands?  I therefore  return  the  papers  for  further  informa- 
tion. Your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Navy  Department. 

Endorsed:  “The  Chf.  of  Bureau  will  give  a reference  to  the  Act  of 

Congress  requiring  the  Pres’ts  approbation,  and  also  say  how  the  Navy  Yard 
is  now  supplied  with  water.  W.  A.  G[raham].” 

The  above  letter  is  in  reply  to  Graham’s  of  September  ioth  enclosing 
request  referred  to.  Other  letters  on  file  with  the  above  are  two  from  Smith 
requesting  the  right  of  running  pipes  from  a spring  on  a public  reservation 
to  the  Navy  Yard  (September  9th)  and  stating  reasons  why  approval  of  the 
President  is  necessary,  etc.,  (September  13th).  Smith  was  Chief  of  the 
Bureau  of  Yards  and  Docks  and  his  letters  are  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy, 
Graham,  the  last  being  in  reply  to  the  request  endorsed  on  the  letter  from 
the  President  to  the  Secretary. 


APPOINTMENT  OF  DEPUTY  APPRAISERS. 

Washington,  October  7,  1850. 

Isaac  Doughty,  Esq. 

Dear  Sir  : I have  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  yours  of 
the  2d  inst.,  in  reference  to  your  being  appointed  one  of  the 
Deputy  Appraisers,  in  New  York.  In  reply  to  which,  I 
would  state,  that  they  are  not  appointed  by  me  but  by  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury;  and  as  I have  made  it  an  in- 
variable rule  not  to  interfere  with  the  appointments  of  the 
Heads  of  Departments  I can  only  regret  that  it  is  not  in  my 
power  to  further  the  success  of  your  application,  otherwise 
it  would  give  me  much  pleasure  to  serve  you. 

Very  respectfully  & truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Corwin  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


CONSTITUTIONALITY  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  LAW. 

Washington,  Oct.  23,  1850. 

[To  Daniel  Webster] 

My  dear  Sir  : Your  letter  of  the  19th  came  to  hand  yes- 
terday, & I am  much  gratified  to  hear  of  your  improved 
health. 


334 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


I have  received  a copy  of  Judge  Woodbury’s  charge  on 
the  Fugitive  Slave  Law,  and  the  Report  of  Judge  Grier’s 
opinion  in  a case  before  him,  all  manfully  sustaining  the 
constitutionality  of  the  law,  and  manifesting  a determined 
resolution  to  carry  it  out.  I have  also  just  received  a joint 
letter  from  Judge  Grier  and  Judge  Keane,  stating  that  a 
case  has  occurred  before  a commission  in  Pennsylvania 
where  the  execution  of  a warrant  under  that  act  was  ‘'for- 
cibly and  successfully  resisted;  the  posse  summoned  to  aid 
the  officer  having  refused  to  act,”  and  “inquiring  whether 
upon  the  recurrence  of  an  obstruction  to  his  Process  he  will 
be  entitled  to  call  for  the  aid  of  such  troops  of  the  United 
States  as  may  be  accessible.” 

This  you  perceive  presents  a very  grave  and  delicate 
question.  I have  not  yet  had  time  to  look  into  it  and  regret 
much  that  so  many  of  my  Cabinet  are  absent,  and  especially 
yourself  and  the  attorney  general.  These  judges  ask  for  a 
general  order  authorizing  the  employment  of  the  troops  in 
such  an  emergency;  and  I am  disposed  to  exert  whatever 
power  I possess  under  the  Constitution  and  laws,  in  enforc- 
ing this  observance.  I have  sworn  to  support  the  Constitu- 
tion. I know  no  higher  law  that  conflicts  with  it ; and  that 
Constitution  says,  “the  President  shall  take  care  that  the 
laws  be  faithfully  executed.”  I mean  at  every  sacrifice  and 
at  every  hazard  to  perform  my  duty.  The  Union  must  and 
shall  be  preserved,  and  this  can  only  be  done,  by  a faithful 
and  impartial  administration  of  the  laws.  I can  not  doubt 
that  in  these  sentiments  you  are  with  me.  And  if  you  have 
occasion  to  speak  I hope  you  will  give  no  encouragement, 
even  by  implication,  to  any  resistance  to  the  law.  Nullifica- 
tion can  not  and  will  not  be  tolerated. 

It  seems  to  me,  with  all  due  deference  to  your  superior 
wisdom,  that  the  true  grounds  for  our  friends  to  take  is  this : 
that  the  law,  hav’g  been  passed,  must  be  executed.  That  so 
far  as  it  provides  for  the  surrender  of  fugitives  from  labor 
it  is  according  to  the  requirements  of  the  Constitution  and 
should  be  sustained  against  all  attempts  at  repeal,  but  if 
there  be  any  provision  in  it  endangering  the  liberty  of  those 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


335 


who  are  free,  it  should  be  so  modified  as  to  secure  the  free 
blacks  from  such  an  abuse  of  the  object  of  the  law,  and  that 
done  we  at  the  North  have  no  just  cause  of  complaint. 

We  must  abide  by  the  Constitution.  If  overthrown,  we 
can  never  hope  for  a better.  God  knows  that  I detest 
Slavery,  but  it  is  an  existing  evil,  for  which  we  are  not  re- 
sponsible, and  we  must  endure  it,  and  give  it  such  protection 
as  is  guaranteed  by  the  Constitution,  till  we  can  get  rid  of 
it  without  destroying  the  last  hope  of  free  government  in 
the  world.  But  pardon  me  for  saying  so  much.  I thought 
possibly  you  might  desire  to  know  my  sentiments,  and  I can 
assure  you,  I am  very  anxious  to  know  yours,  as  to  the 
answer  to  be  given  to  the  Judge’s  letter.  I will,  finally,  send 
a copy  of  it. 

I will  add  something  in  another  letter. 

With  the  highest  consideration  & Respect,  I am  in  great 
haste 

Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

“The  Letters  of  Daniel  Webster,”  edited  by  C.  H.  Van  Tyne,  pp.  437,  438. 


DETERMINED  TO  ENFORCE  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  LAW. 

Washington,  Oct.  28,  1850. 

[To  Daniel  Webster] 

My  dear  Sir:  I have  yours  of  the  24th.  from  Franklin, 

N.  H.,  and  am  greatly  gratified  to  hear  of  your  improved 
health ; and  hope  soon  to  learn  that  your  cough  has  entirely 
left  you.  I infer  that  you  have  not  received  my  letters  of 
the  23d  inst.  addressed  to  you  at  Boston. 

We  have  had  two  Cabinet  meetings,  the  last  this  morning, 
on  the  authority  and  duty  of  the  President  to  use  the  Mili- 
tary force  in  aid  of  the  civil  officer  to  execute  the  fugitive 
slave  law,  and  have  concluded,  when  necessary,  to  do  it. 
We  were  somewhat  embarrassed  by  the  legislation  of  Con- 
gress on  the  subject,  in  1807,  and  subsequent  Acts,  which 


336 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


would  seem  to  imply  that  this  was  a power  to  be  conferred 
by  Congress,  but  after  a careful  examination  of  the  subject, 
I came  to  the  conclusion  that  it  was  an  inherent  Execu- 
tive power  enforced  by  the  Constitution,  when  it  made  the 
President  commander-in-chief  of  the  Army  and  Navy,  and 
required  him  to  take  care  that  the  laws  be  faithfully  exe- 
cuted. In  this,  however,  the  whole  Cabinet  were  not  agreed. 
Some  think  that  the  Marshall  might  summon  the  Army  as 
citizens  and  part  of  the  Comitatus,  but  all  agree  that  the  aid 
should  be  given,  and  the  only  question  was,  when?  We 
concluded  to  give  it  to  the  Marshall  whereas,  he  was  unable 
to  sustain  the  laws  by  the  civil  authority,  and  to  the  special 
deputies  in  the  same  cases  when  a judge  of  the  District  or 
Justice  of  the  Sup.  Court,  should  certify  that  in  his  opinion 
it  was  necessary.  This  direction  is  given  to  the  commanding 
officer  of  the  Marines  at  Philadelphia. 

Congress  having  authorized  the  Marshall  to  provide  tem- 
porary jails,  where  the  Sheriff  refuses  to  admit  the  U.  S. 
prisoners,  we  did  not  think  it  advisable  to  grant  the  use  of 
the  Receiving  ship  at  Boston  for  that  purpose.  But  I mean 
at  all  hazards  to  do  my  part  toward  executing  this  law.  I 
admit  no  right  of  nullification  North  or  South.  My  object, 
however,  has  been  to  avoid  the  use  of  military  force  as  far 
as  possible,  not  doubting  that  there  is  yet  patriotism  enough 
left  in  every  State  North  of  Mason’s  and  Dixon’s  line  to 
maintain  the  Supremacy  of  the  laws ; and  being  particularly 
anxious  that  no  State  should  be  disgraced,  by  being  com- 
pelled to  resort  to  the  army  to  support  the  laws  of  the  Union, 
if  it  could  be  avoided.  I have  therefore  commenced  mildly 
— authorizing  this  force  only  in  the  last  resort,  but  if  neces- 
sary, I shall  not  hesitate  to  give  greater  power,  and  finally 
to  bring  the  whole  force  of  the  government  to  sustain  the 
law.  But  the  mail  is  closing  and  I can  not  say  more. 

I have  also  yours  of  the  25th  inst.  and  am  gratified  to 
hear  that  you  are  preparing  an  answer  to  the  Dist.  Atty.  of 
Mississippi]  and  to  the  Austrian  minister. 

I can  sympathize  with  you  in  the  melancholy  feelings 
which  are  inspired  by  looking  upon  the  grave  of  your  ances- 
tors and  kindred  but  I hope  soon  to  welcome  you  back  to 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


337 


the  busy  scenes  of  active  life  where  your  absence  is  so  much 
deplored  and  your  counsels  so  much  wanted. 

I am  truly  your  friend 

(Have  not  time  to  read  over)  Millard  Fillmore. 

“The  Letters  of  Daniel  Webster,”  edited  by  C.  H.  Van  Tyne,  pp.  438,  439. 


AS  TO  "FUGITIVES  FROM  LABOR.”” 

Washington,  Jany.  io,  1851. 

To  the  Secy  of  State, 

My  dear  Sir  : Accept  my  thanks  for  the  2 R.  S.  of  N. 

Y.  which  I herewith  return.  It  appears  to  me  that  the  act 
is  not  broad  enough  to  prevent  the  issuing  of  a Habeas 
Corpus , to  bring  up  a fugitive  from  labor,  when  the  process 
under  which  he  is  detained  is  issued  by  a commission  and 
not  by  a judge — p.  659,  S.  36- (22).  But  if  the  process  be 
regular,  it  prevents  his  discharge  and  he  must  be  remanded 
— p.  663,  S.  56  (41). 

As  to  the  power  of  the  Jailor  to  keep  such  a fugitive  in 
the  county  jail  there  may  be  some  doubt — p.  872,  S.  1.  He 
is  only  authorized  to  receive  persons  duly  committed  "for 
an  offence  against  the  United  States  ” Can  an  absconding 
of  a slave  from  his  master,  be  deemed  an  offence  against  the 
U.  S.  ? It  seems  to  me  very  doubtful.  Indeed  my  impres- 
sions are  against  it.  But  would  it  not  be  well  to  take  the 
opinion  of  the  Atty.  Genl,  that  we  might  be  prepared  to 
give  prompt  advice  on  the  subject? 

Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


RELATIONS  TOWARDS  AUSTRIA. 

Jan’y  16  [1851]. 

To  the  Secretary  of  the  State, 

My  dear  Sir  : I have  read  & herewith  return,  the  copies 

of  Mr.  Clayton’s  letter,  and  yours  to  him  and  the  Austrian 
Instructions  of  the  5th.  of  Nov.  1849,  to  Mr.  Hiilsemann. 


338 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


I am  a little  surprised  at  the  change  made  in  the  printed 
copy  of  Mr.  Mann’s  instructions.  But  as  you  suspect,  they 
must  have  had  access  to  the  original. 

I noticed,  you  changed  the  original  Draft  of  your  letter 
and  denied  the  use  of  the  phrase  “iron  rule”  and  supposed 
that  you  had  made  a mistake  at  first.  But  if  I recollect 
right  they  predicated  their  complaint,  on  the  correspondence, 
as  published.  If  so  they  cannot  go  behind  the  printed  copy ; 
and  we  at  last  [ ? least]  are  free  from  any  imputation  of 
mutilation.  Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


‘The  Letters  of  Daniel  Webster,”  edited  by  C.  H.  Van  Tyne,  pp.  456,  457. 


A NOTE  OF  THANKS. 

The  President  herewith  returns  Mr.  Dennison’s  letter 
with  many  thanks  for  its  perusal. 

January  18,  [1851] 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


A JUDICIAL  QUESTION. 

Mr.  Webster:  I have  read  and  herewith  return  the 

papers.  It  is  an  unpropitious  time  to  urge  this  claim  upon 
Congress  even  if  it  be  just,  but  I do  not  know  enough  about 
it  to  give  any  opinion.  I only  recollect  it  is  a judicial  ques- 
tion before  the  court. 

I think  to  present  it  even,  could  do  no  good  and  would 
do  harm.  But  I am  willing  to  examine  the  case,  and  if  our 
treaty  stipulations  require  it,  I am  for  complying  with  them 
at  any  and  every  hazzard  (sic).  But  I must  confess  my 
prejudices  are  against  the  validity  of  the  claim,  but  they  are 
based  upon  no  certain  knowledge. 

Truly  Yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Jan’y  25,  [1851] 


Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


339 


ON  THE  SUBJECT  OF  THE  AMISTAD. 

The  Secretary  of  State  submits  for  the  President’s  con- 
sideration the  enclosed  note  from  the  Spanish  Minister  of 
the  8th  instant,  and  a former  one  of  the  14th  Augt  last, 
referred  to,  on  the  subject  of  the  Amistad. 

Washington,  Dept,  of  State,  25  Jany,  1851. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress.  Notes  referred  to  not  accom- 
panying. 


A NOTE  OF  APPOINTMENT. 

The  President  understanding  from  Mr.  Hunter  yesterday 
that  the  Secretary  of  State  desired  to  see  him  before  the 
meeting  of  the  Cabinet  this  morning,  will  be  happy  to  see 
him  now,  either  at  the  Secretary  s office  or  Executive  Cham- 
ber as  may  best  suit  the  convenience  of  the  Secretary. 

Wed.  Feby  4.  10  A.  M. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


SUMMONS  TO  A SENATOR. 

To  the  Hon.  Salmon  P.  Chase,  Senator  from  Ohio, 

Sir  : Whereas  divers  and  weighty  causes  connected  with 

Executive  business  necessary  to  be  transacted  create  an 
extraordinary  occasion  requiring  that  the  Senate  be  con- 
vened, you  are  therefore  requested,  as  a member  of  that 
body,  to  attend  a meeting  thereof,  to  be  holden  at  the  Capi- 
tol, in  the  City  of  Washington,  on  the  fourth  day  of  March 
instant. 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Washington,  March  3d,  1851. 

Chase  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


LETTER  OF  LADY  FRANKLIN. 

The  President  has  the  honor  herewith  to  return  the 
despatches  from  Mr.  Lawrence  together  with  Lady  Frank- 


340 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


lin’s  letter,  and  to  suggest  in  regard  to  the  latter  that  it 
might  be  well  to  have  a joint  consultation  with  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Navy,  before  answering  his  letter. 

March  8.  [1851] 

[To  Daniel  Webster] 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 

Lady  Jane  Franklin  wrote  from  London,  April  4,  1849,  to  President  Taylor, 
setting  forth  the  facts  relating  to  the  Arctic  search  expedition  commanded  by 
her  husband,  Sir  John  Franklin,  and  the  various  relief  measures  which  had  been 
undertaken.  She  called  the  attention  of  the  President  to  the  reward  of 
£20,000,  offered  by  the  British  Board  of  Admiralty,  to  any  ship  or  exploring 
party  “which  should  render  efficient  assistance  to  the  missing  ships,  or  their 
crews.”  Sir  John  Franklin  had  sailed  in  May,  1845,  in  quest  of  the  North- 
west Passage.  His  ships  were  victualled  for  only  three  years;  no  word  had 
come  from  him,  and  there  was  reason  enough  for  the  solicitude,  not  only  of 
Lady  Franklin  and  her  daughter,  but  of  all  humane  nations.  Lady  Franklin’s 
object  in  writing  to  the  President  was  to  beg  that  American  whalers  might 
be  informed  of  the  offered  prize,  and  share  in  the  search  for  the  lost  expedi- 
tion. The  Hon.  John  M.  Clayton,  Secretary  of  State,  assured  her  ladyship 
that  the  American  Government  would  grant  her  wish  in  the  matter.  There  was 
subsequent  correspondence  on  the  subject,  as  referred  to  in  President  Fillmore’s 
note,  above. 


HULSEMANN  CORRESPONDENCE. 

The  President  returns  to  Mr.  Webster,  the  letter  to  Mr. 
Hiilsemann  and  though  he  has  not  the  vanity  to  think  it 
improved  by  his  suggestion,  he  certainly  thinks  it  very  well. 

March  14  [1851] 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


THE  TEHUANTEPEC  ROUTE. 

The  President  would  be  happy  to  see  the  Secretary  of 
State  at  his  earliest  convenience  in  reference  to  the  letter 
of  the  Mexican  Charge  on  the  Tehuantepec  route ; and 
desires  the  Secretary  to  bring  with  him  the  protocol  for 
extending  the  time  for  the  interchange  of  ratifications  of 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


341 


the  treaty,  and  the  projet  submitted  by  the  Mexican  Secre- 
tary of  foreign  affairs  to  Mr.  Letcher  as  a Substitute. 

April  2 [1851] 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


TO  THE  SECRETARY  OF  STATE. 

Washington,  April  16,  1851. 

Hon.  D.  Webster, 

My  dear  Sir:  Yours  of  the  13th  came  to  hand  to  day, 

and  I congratulate  you  and  the  country  upon  a triumph  of 
law  in  Boston.  She  has  done  nobly.  She  has  wiped  out 
the  stain  of  the  former  rescue  and  freed  herself  from  the 
reproach  of  nullification. 

I am  gratified  to  hear  that  your  health  is  improving  and 
we  shall  be  happy  to  welcome  your  return  to  the  counsel 
board  whenever  it  may  suit  your  convenience. 

Movements  are  evidently  making  for  another  piratical 
descent  upon  Cuba.  Letters  and  telegraphic  despatches  speak 
of  armed  men  in  motion  in  Georgia,  but  as  yet  we  can  not 
ascertain  where  they  are  to  rendezvous  or  whence  embark. 
We  have  issued  circulars  to  the  Collectors  and  orders  to 
the  Army  and  Naval  officers  to  arrest  any  movement.  But 
unfortunately  we  have  few  vessels  now  at  the  south. 

South  Carolina  is  far  from  tranquil  as  you  will  see  by 
the  enclosed  slip.  I can  not  but  hope  that  Senator  Butler 
has  been  misrepresented. 

I have  gone  through  with  the  voluminous  testimony  taken 
on  the  Charges  preferred  against  the  collector  and  surveyor 
of  the  Port  of  Philadelphia,  and  am  clearly  of  opinion  that 
the  charges  are  not  sustained.  I requested  Mr.  Corwin  to 
send  for  Mr.  Lewis  and  inform  him  of  the  result,  but  that 
the  proof  was  such  as  to  require  a purgation  of  the  weigher’s 
office,  and  I suggested  to  him  that  I wished  he  would  turn 
out  Loco  focos  and  put  good  competent  Whigs  in  their 
places  wherever  it  could  be  done  without  prejudice  to  the 
public  service,  and  that  in  making  his  new  appointments  he 
would  as  far  as  practicable  select  from  that  portion  of  the 


342 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


party  which  complained  of  having  been  overlooked,  and  he 
promised  to  do  so. 

I learn  by  telegraph  that  Pennsylvania  has  repealed  her 
law  which  refused  the  use  of  her  jails  for  fugitives. 

I understand  efforts  are  making  to  induce  the  Whigs  in 
the  Legislature  of  N.  Y.  to  issue  an  address  against  the 
compromise  measures;  and  especially  against  the  Fugitive 
Slave  law.  Should  this  be  done  a counter  address  will  also 
be  issued. 

Hearing  nothing  from  Mr.  Chandler  as  to  a candidate 
for  the  consulate  at  Belfast  I have  written  him  to  day  calling 
his  attention  to  the  subject. 

I see  by  the  paper  that  Sir  Henry  is  in  Charleston.  Has 
his  visit  any  connexion  with  the  movement  of  the  British 
consul  as  to  the  imprisonment  of  black  seamen? 

I hope  you  may  make  some  satisfactory  arrangement  for 
the  trial  of  the  rescues.  It  is  very  important  that  these 
criminals  should  be  punished.  Their  crime  is  contagious, 
and  they  must  not  escape  with  impunity. 

I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


MORMONS  SEEK  ASYLUM  IN  LAKE  MICHIGAN. 

Executive  Mansion,  Washington,  April  30,  1851. 
Hon.  J.  J.  Crittenden, 

Sir  : I have  this  moment  received  from  the  Commis- 

sioner of  the  Land  office  the  letter  of  Mr.  Bates  Dist  Atty 
of  Mich  in  relation  to  the  Mormon  settlement  on  Big  Bear 
[Beaver]  island  in  Lake  Michigan  with  maps  and  explana- 
tions, which  are  respectfully  referred  to  you  for  your 
opinion  as  Atty  General,  and  having  given  that,  I wish  you 
as  acting  Secretary  of  the  Interior  to  issue  such  instructions 
to  the  Marshall  and  District  Atty  of  Michigan  for  carrying 
them  out,  as  may  be  necessary. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


343 


If  necessary  the  Revenue  Cutter  or  Naval  vessel  on  the 
upper  Lakes,  will  be  put  under  the  control  of  the  Marshall 
to  enable  him  to  execute  any  process  or  order. 

I am  your  obedient  servant 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Crittenden  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 

The  letter  referred  to  above  is  as  follows: 

Detroit,  March  12,  1851. 

Hon.  G.  [!]  Daniel  Webster. 

Sir:  All  the  facts,  contained  in  the  within  statement,  can  be  got  at  by 

legal  evidence  by  a complaint,  under  the  8th  Section  of  the  act  of  Sept.  1850 
against  the  person  who  sent  the  telegraphic  despatch  referred  to  and  who 
then  prevented  the  Master  from  wresting  the  fugitives.  If  Atty  General  will 
instruct  me  to  make  the  complaint,  before  a Commissioner  I am  satisfied,  that 
I can  get  hold  of  the  persons  who  sent  the  despatch  and  in  the  examination  of 
him  show  precisely  what  was  the  real  conduct  of  the  Officers.  If  the  Atty 
Gen.  concludes  to  send  me  such  instructions  please  ask  him  to  telegraph  me 
" To  proceed I can  get  all  the  testimony  except  Chesters  in  a week. 

Your  obedient  Servant,  George  C.  Bates. 

June  15,  1850,  a memorial  was  presented  to  the  United  States  Senate, 
signed  by  James  J.  Strang,  George  J.  Adams  and  William  Marks,  “presidents 
of  the  Church  of  the  Saints,  apostles  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  witnesses 
of  His  name  unto  all  nations,”  asking  that  Congress  would  pass  a law  giving 
the  consent  of  the  nation  that  the  Saints  “might  settle  upon  and  forever 
occupy  all  the  uninhabited  lands  of  the  islands  in  Lake  Michigan,”  and  cease 
to  sell  the  same  to  other  persons;  and  asking  of  the  people  of  the  United 
States,  “as  they  have  not  allowed  their  brethren  to  remain  in  peace  with  them, 
that  they  will  at  least  suffer  them  to  remain  there,  separate  from  them.”  The 
memorial  set  forth  that  ten  thousand  men,  women  and  children  were  illegally 
expelled  from  the  State  of  Missouri,  plundered  of  their  possessions,  exiled  from 
their  homes  and  driven  in  destitution,  hunger  and  want,  in  midwinter,  to  a 
distant  land,  passing  much  of  the  way  in  the  midst  of  foes  who  not  only 
refused  them  shelter  and  food,  but  kept  them  in  continual  danger.  “If  you 
tell  us,”  it  ran,  “as  some  of  your  predecessors  told  our  martyred  prophets 
while  they  were  yet  alive,  that  you  have  no  power  to  redress  our  wrongs, 
then  there  is  presented  to  the  world  the  melancholy  spectacle  of  the  greatest 
Republic  on  earth,  a Christian  nation,  acknowledging  itself  powerless  to  judge; 
unable  to  protect  the  right;  a nation  on  whose  righteousness  half  the  earth 
rests  the  hopes  of  man,  confessing  that  there  is  a power  above  the  law,  riding 
down  the  Constitution,  which  stalks  abroad  to  plunder  and  banish  the  citizens, 
and  none  to  rebuke;  murders  the  unoffending  innocent,  and  none  to  say,  ‘Why 
do  ye  so?’  Which  sanctifies  its  deeds  of  violence  even  in  the  eyes  of  religious 
men,  by  blackening  the  fame  of  their  glorious  deeds  with  the  name  of  crimes, 
which  in  their  lifetime  it  dared  not  attempt  to  prove,  even  in  its  own  tribunals.” 
This  curious  memorial,  which  accused  and  indicted  the  Government  from 
which  it  solicited  favors,  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Public  Lands, 
which  reported  that  the  Government  did  not  own  the  lands  the  Saints  coveted. 

George  C.  Bates  was  appointed  United  States  District  Attorney  by  Presi- 
dent Harrison,  in  1841,  and  was  serving  in  this  capacity  at  Detroit  when  the 
above  letter  was  written.  To  the  Detroit  Advertiser  and  Tribune  of  July  12, 


344 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


1877,  he  contributed  a long  account  of  the  procedure  by  the  Government  against 
the  Mormons  on  Beaver  Island  and  of  the  trial  in  Detroit  of  “King”  Strang 
and  others,  conducted  on  behalf  of  the  Government  by  himself.  In  this  article 
Mr.  Bates  represents  President  Fillmore  as  being  loath  to  prosecute  the  Mor- 
mons, because  they  held  sufficient  voting  power  in  Michigan  to  make  their 
influence  worth  seeking.  This  narrative  by  Bates  is  republished  in  the  “His- 
torical Collections,”  Michigan  Pioneer  and  Historical  Society,  volume  32.  The 
same  volume  contains  numerous  other  papers  giving  various  phases  of  the 
history  of  the  Mormon  occupation  of  the  islands  in  Lake  Michigan.  One  of 
these  papers,  “A  Moses  of  the  Mormons,”  by  Henry  E.  Legler — first  published 
by  the  Parkman  Club  of  Milwaukee,  1897 — states  that  while  visiting  a brother 
in  Detroit,  President  Fillmore  learned  that  among  the  remote  islands  of  Lake 
Michigan  James  J.  Strang  had  established  what  he  termed  a kingdom,  but 
what  was  actually  a nest  of  freebooters  engaged  in  robbing  the  mails  and 
conterfeiting  United  States  coin.  Mr.  Fillmore  dispatcher!  the  steamer  Michi- 
gan to  Beaver  Island  for  the  arrest  of  Strang  on  a charge  of  treason.  The 
events  that  followed  constitute  a unique  romance  in  the  history  of  the  Great 
Lakes.  Strang  was  acquitted  at  his  trial,  and  subsequently  served  in  the 
Michigan  Legislature;  but  was  finally  murdered  and  the  Mormon  colony  dis- 
persed, after  many  episodes  of  bloodshed. 

From  allusions  in  the  papers  by  Mr.  Legler,  Mr.  Bates  and  others,  it  would 
seem  probable  that  President  Fillmore  engaged  in  considerable  correspondence 
in  the  matter,  but  the  letter  here  printed  is  the  only  one  found  by  him  bearing 
upon  it.  It  should  be  noted  that  the  memorial  presented  to  Congress  in  June, 
1850,  was  not  so  presented  until  after  Strang’s  colony  of  Mormons  had  occu- 
pied Beaver  Island  for  some  three  years. 


DIPLOMATIC  LETTER  TO  THE  EMPEROR  OF  JAPAN. 

Millard  Fillmore,  President  of  the  United  States  of  America, 
to  His  Imperial  Majesty,  the  Emperor  of  Japan. 

Great  and  Good  Friend  : 

I send  you  this  letter,  by  an  Envoy  of  my  own  appoint- 
ment, an  officer  of  high  rank  in  his  country,  who  is  no  mis- 
sionary of  religion.  He  goes  by  my  command  to  bear  to 
you  my  greeting  and  good  wishes,  and  to  promote  friend- 
ship and  commerce  between  the  two  countries. 

You  know  that  the  United  States  of  America  now  extend 
from  sea  to  sea,  that  the  great  countries  of  Oregon  and 
California,  are  parts  of  the  United  States,  and  that  from 
these  countries,  which  are  rich  in  gold  and  silver  and  pre- 
cious stones,  our  steamers  can  reach  the  shores  of  your 
happy  land  in  less  than  twenty  days. 

Many  of  our  ships  will  now  pass  in  every  year,  and 
some  perhaps  in  every  week  between  California  and  China ; 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


345 


these  ships  must  pass  along  the  coasts  of  your  Empire; 
storms  and  winds  may  cause  them  to  be  wrecked  on  your 
shores,  and  we  ask  and  expect  from  your  friendship  and 
your  greatness,  kindness  for  our  men  and  protection  for  our 
property.  We  wish  that  our  People  may  be  permitted  to 
trade  with  your  People,  but  we  shall  not  authorize  them 
to  break  any  law  of  your  Empire. 

Our  object  is  friendly  commercial  intercourse  and  noth- 
ing more.  You  have  many  productions,  which  we  should  be 
glad  to  buy,  and  we  have  productions  which  might  suit  your 
people. 

Your  Empire  hath  a great  abundance  of  coal,  this  is  an 
article  which  our  steamships,  in  going  from  California  to 
China,  must  use.  They  would  be  glad  that  a harbour  in 
your  Empire  should  be  appointed,  to  which  coal  might  be 
brought,  and  where  they  might  always  be  able  to  purchase  it. 

In  many  other  respects  commerce  between  your  Empire 
and  our  Country  would  be  useful  to  both.  Let  us  consider 
well,  what  new  interests  arise  from  these  recent  events, 
which  have  brought  our  two  countries  so  near  together; — 
and  what  purposes  of  friendship,  amity  and  intercourse  they 
ought  to  inspire  into  the  breasts  of  those  who  govern  both 
countries. — Farewell. 

Given  under  my  hand  and  seal  at  the 

[Seal]  City  of  Washington,  the  ioth  day  of  May, 

1851,  and  of  the  Independence  of  the 
United  States  the  seventy-fifth. 

Millard  Fillmore. 

By  the  President 
Daniel  Webster, 

Secretary  of  State. 

Connarroe  collection,  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania. 

The  foregoing  letter  is  not  included  in  the  “Narrative  of  the  Expedition 

. . . under  the  command  of  Commodore  M.  C.  Perry,”  etc.,  published  in 

three  quarto  volumes  at  Washington,  1856.  Compare  with  President  Fillmore’s 
letter  of  November  13,  1852,  to  the  Mikado.  The  above  document,  written  by 
Mr.  Fillmore  and  countersigned  by  Daniel  Webster,  bears  no  indication  of 
having  been  presented  to  the  Mikado  of  Japan.  It  is  probably  the  first  letter 
drawn  up  for  the  purpose,  the  letter  of  November  13,  1852,  being  substituted 
for  it. 


346 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


A QUESTION  OF  SALT. 

Washington,  June  17,  1851. 

Hon.  W.  A.  Graham,  Secy,  of  the  Navy. 

Dr.  Sir  : I send  herewith  for  your  consideration,  a copy 

of  a Report  made  to  the  Gen1.  Assembly  of  the  State  of  N. 
York  on  the  manufacture  of  salt — as  complaints  are  made 
that  the  regulations  of  your  Department,  requiring  that  salt 
provisions  for  the  use  of  the  Navy  should  be  put  up  in 
Turks  Island  salt,  unjustly  depreciate  the  value  of  the  coarse 
salt  of  that  State. 

Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Navy  Department. 

See  Fillmore  to  Secretary  of  Navy,  July  17,  1852. 


TO  MEET  PERUVIAN  REPRESENTATIVE. 

The  President  will  be  happy  to  see  the  Secretary  of  State 
at  1 2 to  day  with  the  Charge  of  Peru  as  suggested. 

Wednesday,  June  18.  [1851] 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


AN  APPOINTMENT. 


To  Hon.  Charles  M.  Conrad,  Secretary  of  War: 

You  are  hereby  appointed  Acting  Secretary  of  the  Navy 
during  the  temporary  absence  from  the  Seat  of  Government 
of  the  Hon.  William  A.  Graham. 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Washington,  July  11,  1851. 

Navy  Department  letter-books. 

A second  letter  to  same  effect  May  19,  1852;  3d  letter  to  same  effect 
(absence  of  Kennedy)  September  3,  1852;  4th  letter,  A.  H.  H.  Stuart,  to 
same  effect,  September  25,  1852;  5th  letter,  Charles  W.  Skinner,  same  effect, 
September  27,  1852.  All  in  letter  books,  Navy  Department. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


347 


TO  THE  SECRETARY  OF  STATE. 

Washington,  July  19,  1851. 

Hon.  D.  Webster, 

My  dear  Sir:  I am  happy  to  see  by  the  Telegraph  that 

you  arrived  safely  in  N.  York  last  evening  and  was  “enthu- 
siastically received ” 

Mr.  Benjamin  from  N.  O.  called  here  yesterday,  express- 
ing great  anxiety  about  the  Tehantepec  [sic]  treaty.  Says 
it  is  all  important  that  Mr.  Letcher  should  return  by  the 
1st  of  Sept,  as  there  is  to  be  an  extra  Session  of  the  Mexican 
Congress  at  that  time,  and  that  Mr.  L.  has  said  that  he 
never  intends  to  return  and  he  does  not  believe  that  he  does. 
He  further  says  that  the  Rail  Road  Co.  intend  to  insist  on 
the  validity  of  their  grant.  That  they  will  send  out  500  men 
to  prosecute  the  work,  and  they  will  be  prepared  to  resist 
any  attempt  to  drive  them  off ; and  that  a collision  with  the 
Mexican  authorities  will  force  this  Government  either  to 
sustain  its  own  citizens,  or  declare  that  they  are  violating 
the  law  of  neutrality,  and  unite  with  Mexico  in  punishing 
them. 

I deem  this  a very  important  national  enterprise;  and 
am  prepared  to  do  any  thing  we  can  honorably  to  sustain 
it.  I have  accordingly  directed  Mr.  Derrick  to  ascertain 
from  the  Mexican  Minister  if  there  will  be  an  extra  session 
of  the  Mexican  Congress  in  Sept,  and  if  so  to  write  Mr. 
Letcher  and  ascertain  from  him  whether  we  can  certainly 
rely  upon  his  being  there,  and  if  not  we  must  appoint 
another  person.  If  a new  man  is  to  go,  it  is  even  more 
important  that  he  should  be  there  at  the  Extra  Session  than 
if  Mr.  Letcher  returned.  I doubt  not  the  British  minister 
is  doing  what  he  can  to  defeat  the  grant,  and  the  Treaty, 
and  I fear  that  all  will  be  virtually  settled  at  the  Sept.  Ses- 
sion. I fear  all  will  fail,  hut  there  must  he  no  failure  on 
our  part  to  accomplish  so  desirable  an  object. 

While,  however,  I am  willing  to  do  all  we  can  legiti- 
mately to  accomplish  this  object,  I am  not  willing  to  see 
the  nation  involved  in  war  with  Mexico  to  gratify  the  wishes 


348 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


or  cupidity  of  any  private  company.  And  I think  Mr.  Ben- 
jamin should  be  given  distinctly  to  understand  (if  you  con- 
cur with  me)  that  these  are  our  views  and  that  we  shall  not 
be  coerced  into  any  other  line  of  conduct. 

Mr.  Benjamin  will  visit  you  soon..  I enclose  some  slips 
on  this  subject  from  the  “True  Delta ” of  the  9 and  10th  inst. 

Since  I commenced  this  letter  I have  received  through 
Col.  Burnley  a telegraphic  despatch  from  Mr.  Letcher,  dated 
on  the  17th  saying:  “I  have  received  important  communi- 
cations from  Mexico.  Hope  no  action  will  be  taken  till  I 
reach  Washington  city  in  five  days.” 

When  he  arrives,  should  I deem  it  important  for  you  to 
be  here  I will  telegraph  you. 

I write  in  haste  and  hardly  legible  but  I am 

Truly  yours,  Millard  Fillmore. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


TO  THE  SECRETARY  OF  STATE. 

Washington,  July  19,  1851. 

Hon.  D.  Webster  : I wrote  you  yesterday  at  N.  Y.  on  the 
subject  of  the  Tehuantepec  Treaty,  and  this  morning  re- 
ceived your  note  of  yesterday  saying  that  you  were  to  leave 
for  Boston  last  evening. 

We  had  only  Messrs.  Stuart 1 and  Conrad  at  our  Cabinet 
meeting  to  day,  but  fortunately  no  business.  Mr.  Corwin 
is  expected  tomorrow. 

I enclose  you  a very  excellent  letter  from  “Kossuth”  in 
which  he  does  no  more  than  justice  to  you  for  your  unan- 
swerable and  unanswered  letter  to  the  Austrian  Mission. 
You  will  note  his  suggestion  at  the  close. 

I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 

1.  Alexander  Hugh  Holmes  Stuart  was  appointed  by  President  Fillmore 
to  be  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  and  held  that  office  from  July  22,  1850,  to  the 
close  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  Administration.  Thomas  Corwin,  referred  to  in  this 
letter,  was  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  Charles  M.  Conrad,  the  Secretary  of 
War,  took  office  July  15,  1850,  and  served  till  March  7,  1853,  when  he  was 
succeeded  by  Jefferson  Davis. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


349 


TO  THE  SECRETARY  OF  STATE. 

Washington,  July  26,  1851, 
3P.  M. 

My  dear  Sir:  The  Cabinet  has  just  adjourned.  Mr. 

Corwin  is  extremely  anxious  to  see  you  before  you  go  North. 
When  will  you  return  here? 

I think  we  were  misled  by  Mr.  Letcher’s  despatch  of  the 
17th.  He  should  have  been  here  two  days  since.  But  instead 
of  that  I now  have  one  dated  yesterday  at  Frankfort  saying 
that  he  “will  be  in  Washington  in  a few  days,  ready  to  obey 
the  President’s  wishes.” 

This  is  a hot  day  here,  and  I have  concluded  to  leave 
for  our  Virginia  Springs  in  company  with  Mr.  Stewart 
[ ? Stuart]  on  the  5th  of  August. 

I received  yours  of  the  23d  this  morning,  giving  a most 
interesting  account  of  Marchfield  [sic]  and  its  vicinity.  It 
was  so  refreshing  this  hot  day  that  I read  it  to  Mrs.  F.  and 
the  Cabinet  and  we  all  envied  you  your  delightful  retreat. 
It  must  be  a perfect  paradise;  and  if  I could  annihilate  an 
intermediate  space  I should'  be  very  happy  to  look  in  upon 
you.  But  our  messenger  waits. 

Adieu.  I am  as  ever  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Hon.  D.  Webster. 

Webster  collection.  Library  of  Congress. 


RELATIONS  WITH  MEXICO,  ETC. 

White  Sulphur  Springs,  Va., 

Sunday,  Augt.  17,  1851. 

Hon.  D.  Webster, 

My  dear  Sir:  Yours  of  the  10th  from  Franklin  came 

to  hand  last  evening,  and  I was  much  gratified  to  hear  that 
your  health  is  no  worse,  but  I look  forward  with  great 
anxiety  to  the  25th  which  if  I recollect  right,  is  the  fatal 
anniversary  of  the  return  of  your  annual  disease.  I do 


350 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


hope  it  may  pass  leaving  you  in  health ; for  if  it  does  I shall 
think  you  have  found  a remedy  that  may  save  you  from  this 
terrible  affliction  for  all  time.  I am  glad  to  hear  that  your 
son  is  with  you. 

Time  passes  here  as  usual  at  a watering-place.  I leave 
in  the  morning  for  the  “Sweet  Springs ” 1 7 miles  distant, 
and  shall  leave  for  Washington  via  the  Natural  Bridge, 
Lexington,  Lynchburg,  and  Charlottesville  a week  from 
tomorrow,  and  hope  to  be  there  on  the  30th. 

Genl.  Scott  estimated  the  expense  of  maintaining  our 
treaty  stipulations  with  Mexico,  by  defending  her  from  the 
Indians,  at  $10,000,000  per  annum ; and  that  this  must  con- 
tinue for  10  or  15  years.  I do  not  myself  suppose  that  we 
shall  actually  expend  that,  but  I fear  that  it  will  be  a con- 
stant source  of  iritation  and  complaint,  and  I am  therefore 
anxious  to  get  rid  of  it.  Mexico  may  spend  the  money  fool- 
ishly, and  neglect  the  defence  of  her  own  citizens,  but  we 
can  hardly  be  responsible  for  that. 

I still  hope  that  Mr.  Corwin  will  consent  to  remain.  I 
believe  the  whole  Cabinet  think  he  should.  It  will  be  very 
difficult  to  supply  his  place. 

I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


THE  CUBAN  AFFAIR — VARIOUS  MATTERS. 

Hon.  D.  Webster, 

My  dear  Sir  : I returned  somewhat  prematurely  and  in 

much  haste  on  Saturday  evening,  and  have  been  very  busy 
with  Cuban  matters  ever  since. 

I was  not  satisfied  with  the  excuse  made  by  the  Collector 
at  N.  Orleans  for  suffering  the  Steamer  Pampero  to  sail 
for  Cuba  without  any  effort  to  stop  her,  and  I have  removed 
him  and  appointed  Mr.  Adams  in  his  place. 

I have  issued  new  powers  either  to  the  Collectors  or 
Marshalls  under  the  8th  Section  of  the  act  of  1818,  at  New 
Port,  N.  York,  Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  Charleston,  Savan- 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


351 


nah,  St.  Augustine,  Key  West,  Mobile,  N.  Orleans  & Gal- 
veston, and  a new  circular  enjoining  vigilance  upon  the  dis- 
trict attorneys  at  those  places,  and  requiring  all  the  collec- 
tors, district  attorneys  and  Marshalls  at  those  places  who 
may  be  absent  from  home  to  return  forthwith , and  attend 
vigilantly  to  prevent  any  expedition  from  being  fitted  out 
against  the  provisions  of  that  act.  The  army  and  Navy 
have  also  been  called  into  requisition  at  any  place  where 
we  have  troops  or  vessels  to  aid  in  arresting  any  such  expe- 
dition. 

In  times  like  this,  the  telegraph  in  the  hands  of  irre- 
sponsible and  designing  men  is  a tremendous  engine  for 
mischief,  aided  as  it  is  in  many  places  by  a mercenary  and 
prostituted  press.  Agitation  and  excitement  seem  to  per- 
vade all  the  large  cities,  and  this  is  greatly  aggravated  by 
unscrupulous  partizans  who  desire  to  turn  it  to  political 
account  against  the  Administration.  I think  the  summary 
execution  of  the  50  prisoners  taken  in  Cuba,  was  unfor- 
tunate. This  wholesale  slaughter  of  officers  and  men  in 
so  summary  a manner,  naturally  excited  the  sympathy  and 
indignation  of  the  community.  But  I still  hope  to  prevent 
any  further  violation  of  our  neutrality  laws,  and  to  save  our 
young  men  from  a similar  fate. 

Lopez  seems  still  at  large.  But  making  no  head  way. 
Reports  are  so  contradictory  we  know  not  what  to  believe. 
He  can  not  remain  in  Statu  quo.  He  must  advance  or  fail. 

I have  yours  of  the  19th  & 23d,  and  saw  the  one  of  a 
later  date  to  the  P.  M.  Genl,  and  I have  hardly  words  to 
express  the  gratification  I feel  that  you  have  thus  far  escaped 
your  annual  catarrh  with  a prospect  of  avoiding  [it]  entirely. 
Do  make  yourself  perfectly  easy  and  enjoy  the  quiet  of  your 
resting  place.  Your  presence  at  the  council  board  would  be 
very  acceptable,  especially  just  now ; but  it  is  not  indispensa- 
ble, and  I hope  you  will  feel  no  anxiety  on  the  subject. 

I am  willing  that  Mr.  Forward  should  be  recalled  at  once, 
and  the  place  remain  open  till  the  meeting  of  Congress. 

I still  faintly  hope  that  Mr.  Corwin  may  conclude  to 
remain.  At  any  rate  he  will  not  resign  till  after  the  October 


352 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


election.  I shall  be  greatly  puzzled  to  find  a successor.  I 
have  thought  of  none  better  than  Joseph  G.  Ingersoll.  But 
Pa.  is  all  in  confusion,  and  I can  not  tell  till  after  the  elec- 
tion whether  it  will  do  to  appoint  him. 

I fear  I can  not  go  to  Boston,  this  Cuban  matter  may 
prevent. 

I am  told  that  Mr.  Walsh  will  decline  the  appointment  of 
Secy  of  legation  to  Mexico,  unless  he  can  have  some  assur- 
ance that  when  the  Mission  is  vacant,  he  shall  be  charge  &c 
I think  I will  wait  a little  and  see  if  I can  not  find  another 
person. 

I enclose  you  two  private  letters  from  Buckingham  Smith, 
the  locality  of  our  embassy  seems  somewhat  singular,  and 
the  statement  as  to  Mr.  Tasistro  is  worthy  of  consideration. 
I fear  from  what  I have  heard  of  his  character  that  it  may 
be  true.  But  you  can  judge  best. 

I write  in  great  haste  but  am,  my  Dear  Sir, 

Truly  & sincerely  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

P.  S.  If  the  present  troubles  continue  I think  I shall 
appoint  Mr.  Crittenden  acting  Secy  of  State  as  soon  as  he 
returns.  Mr.  Derrick  is  very  feeble  and  it  is  important  for 
one  to  execute  many  of  the  orders  well,  that  he  should  hear 
their  discussion  in  council. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


CONFIDENTIAL,  TO  MR.  WEBSTER. 

Washington,  Sept.  10,  1851. 

Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

My  dear  Sir:  I was  much  alarmed  last  evening  by 

hearing  that  a telegraphic  despatch  had  been  received,  say- 
ing that  you  were  very  sick,  but  was  relieved  this  morning 
by  another  in  the  Republic , saying  that  you  were  in  Boston 
and  very  well. 

I infer  however  from  yours  of  the  8th  which  has  just 
come  to  hand,  that  neither  despatch  was  entirely  correct. 
But  I am  greatly  gratified  to  learn  that  you  have  thus  far 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


353 


escaped  the  catarrh.  I am  sorry*  however  to  hear  that  you 
are  threatened  with  the  gout.  I know  nothing  of  the  dis- 
ease except  by  report,  but  if  not  dangerous,  it  must  be 
extremely  painful.  I hope  soon  to  hear  that  you  are  entirely 
restored.  I shall  be  happy  to  see  you  here  at  your  earliest 
convenience,  but  not  so  soon  as  to  endanger  your  health. 

The  telegraph  brings  us  the  afflicting  intelligence  of  Mrs. 
Crittenden’s  death.  This  will  be  a severe  blow  to  Mr.  Crit- 
tenden, and  may  delay  his  return  for  some  time.  I feel 
that  it  is  a very  great  loss  to  our  circle  of  friends.  She  was 
a most  remarkable  woman,  and  I should  think  almost  indis- 
pensable to  her  husband’s  happiness. 

I have  declined  the  invitation  to  Boston.  I feel  unwilling 
to  leave  the  city  while  the  Pampero  is  yet  at  sea.  Should 
she  be  captured  by  a Spanish  man  of  war,  before  landing  in 
Cuba,  it  might  present  a very  delicate  and  embarrassing 
question,  and  I should  prefer  being  here  where  I could  act 
promptly. 

The  vacancy  occasioned  by  the  death  of  Judge  Woodbury 
will  soon  have  to  be  filled ; and  I should  be  happy  to  see  you 
that  we  might  converse  freely  on  the  subject. 

I believe  that  Judge  McLean  is  the  only  Whig  now  upon 
the  Bench ; and  he  received  his  appointment  from  Genl 
Jackson.  I am  therefore  desirous  of  obtaining  as  long  a 
lease  and  as  much  moral  and  judicial  power  as  possible  from 
this  appointment.  I would  therefore  like  to  combine  a vig- 
orous constitution,  with  high  moral  and  intellectual  quali- 
fications, a good  judicial  mind,  and  such  age  as  gives  a 
prospect  of  long  service.  Several  distinguished  names  have 
occurred  to  me,  but  I do  not  consider  myself  so  intimately 
acquainted  with  the  N.  England  bar,  as  to  be  able  to  form 
a competent  opinion.  I have  however  formed  a very  high 
opinion  of  Mr.  B.  R.  Curtis.  What  do  you  say  of  him? 
What  is  his  age?  constitution?  & legal  attainments?  Does 
he  fill  the  measure  of  my  wishes  ? 

The  weather  is  extremely  hot  and  uncomfortable.  Noth- 
ing new.  I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Webster  collection.  Library  of  Congress. 


354 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


TO  MR.  WEBSTER. 

Washington,  Sept.  12,  1851. 

Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

My  dear  Sir:  I have  yours  of  the  10th  and  regret  to 

hear  of  the  accident  which  exposed  you  to  the  night  air  to 
the  injury  of  your  health. 

I am  happy  to  see  that  we  concur  in  opinion  as  to  Mr. 
B.  R.  Curtis.  I shall  wait  until  you  can  see  Mr.  Choate, 
and  if  all  is  satisfactory,  I will  issue  the  commission  at  once. 

Since  declining  the  invitation  to  Boston,  we  have  intelli- 
gence that  the  Pampero  is  at  Jacksonville,  and  probably  she 
will  make  no  further  effort  on  Cuba.  Learning  from  tele- 
graph that  the  motives  for  my  declining  were  likely  to  be 
misunderstood  and  misrepresented,  and  this  change  in  public 
affairs  leaving  one  at  liberty  to  attend,  I had  a Cabinet  meet- 
ing this  morning,  and  most  of  the  Cabinet  thought  upon 
the  whole  I had  better  go,  and  I have  concluded  to  do  so. 
I am  also  urged  to  this  by  a desire  to  visit  my  family  who 
are  detained  at  N.  Port,  by  an  accident,  by  which  Mrs.  F. 
has  sprained  her  foot  so  seriously  as  to  be  unable  to  touch 
it  from  the  floor.  I fear  she  will  have  great  difficulty  in 
returning  to  Washington. 

But  I shall  desire  to  see  you  very  much,  and  if  you  can- 
not be  at  Boston,  I shall  try  to  go  to  Marshfield. 

I write  in  haste  but  am 

Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


ENGLAND  TO  PROTECT  CUBA. 

Washington  City,  Oct.  2,  1851. 

Hon.  D.  Webster, 

My  dear  Sir:  Yours  of  the  28th  enclosing  the  appli- 

cation of  Julius  C.  Kretschmar  for  the  consulate  at  Palermo 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


355 


came  to  hand  yesterday,  and  I regret  to  hear  that  you  are 
not  yet  free  from  your  afflicting  catarrh. 

I intended  to  have  seen  you  again  before  I left  Boston 
but  when  they  sent  for  me  to  go  to  the  dinner,  I understood 
you  were  engaged  in  receiving  the  ladies,  and  I went  directly 
from  the  dinner  to  the  cars. 

My  visit  was  a very  agreeable  one,  but  very  fatiguing. 
I am  gratified  to  hear  that  it  passed  off  satisfactorily  to 
the  Bostonians,  for  really  they  are  a very  remarkable  people. 
No  other  city,  I think,  could  have  made  so  fine  a display, 
and  I was  particularly  gratified  to  see  the  unequivocal  dem- 
onstration of  respect  and  esteem  for  you  which  were  mani- 
fested at  the  State  House. 

Since  writing  the  foregoing  I have  seen  a telegraphic 
statement  in  the  Philadelphia  papers  of  the  30th  saying  that 
there  was  a rumor  in  Boston  that  you  were  dangerously  ill. 
I hope  and  trust  that  this  is  not  so.  I have  sent  to  the 
Department  of  State  and  they  have  no  such  intelligence; 
and  as  the  telegraph  lies  very  much  I sincerely  hope  it  lies 
in  this  instance. 

Our  weather  here  is  very  fine,  and  I really  wish  you 
could  be  here  to  enjoy  it  with  us. 

I will  wait  until  I hear  from  you  again  before  filling  the 
consulate  at  Palermo. 

I wish  we  could  fill  the  commission  at  China.  Genl. 
Edna  is  pressing  and  Palmer  from  N.  York  is  here  again. 
Mr.  Graham  thinks  Edna  is  not  fit  and  recommends  Wad- 
dell if  we  go  to  N.  C.  but  I think  some  commercial  town  is 
most  likely  to  furnish  a proper  man. 

Nicaragua  you  see  is  in  a state  of  Revolution.  I think 
it  would  be  well  that  our  consul  was  at  Realigo,  and  if  Mr. 
Boone  is  not  going  should  we  not  appoint  another. 

Mr.  Rives  writes  that  a treaty  has  been  entered  into 
between  France,  Spain  and  Great  Britain  to  guaranty  Cuba 
to  Spain,  but  does  not  send  it,  or  its  contents  or  date.  The 
English  Charge  gives  verbal  notice  that  England  has  ordered 
her  vessels  to  protect  Cuba  against  the  unlawful  invasion 
from  this  country,  but  says  he  knows  of  no  treaty.  Mr. 


356 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


Rives  has  been  written  to  for  further  information.  It  appears 
to  me  that  such  a step  on  the  part  of  G.  Britain  is  ill  advised ; 
and  if  the  attempts  upon  Cuba  shall  be  renewed  (which  I 
trust  they  will  not  be)  any  attempts  to  prevent  such  expedi- 
tions by  British  cruisers  must  necessarily  involve  a right 
of  search  into  our  whole  mercantile  marine  in  those  seas, 
to  ascertain  who  ought  to  be  arrested,  and  who  ought  to 
pass,  and  this  would  be  extremely  annoying  and  well  calcu- 
lated to  disturb  the  friendly  relations  now  existing  between 
the  two  governments. 

But  I have  been  interrupted  and  the  mail  is  closing  and 
I have  not  time  to  say  more.  When  may  we  hope  to  have 
the  pleasure  of  seeing  you  in  Washington?  Though  your 
presence  would  at  all  times  be  very  acceptable,  yet  give 
yourself  no  uneasiness.  Remain  quiet  until  you  feel  able 
to  come. 

In  hopes  that  your  health  may  be  speedily  restored, 

I remain  sincerely  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


DISTURBANCES  IN  MEXICO. 

Washington  City,  Oct.  io,  1851. 

Hon.  D.  Webster, 

Secretary  of  State, 

My  dear  Sir:  Yours  of  the  4th  from  Marshfield,  came 

to  hand  on  the  7th  and  I am  much  gratified  to  learn  that 
your  catarrh  is  in  its  last  stages ; and  that  we  may  expect 
you  here  by  the  twentieth. 

An  insurrection  or  Revolution  seems  actually  to  have 
broken  out  in  Tamaulipas,  Mexico.  In  anticipation  of  this 
I had  issued  authority  to  Generals  Twiggs  and  P.  F.  Smith, 
with  instruction  to  prevent  any  infraction  of  our  neutrality 
laws  on  the  Mexican  frontier;  and  I have  as  yet  received 
no  information  that  any  armed  or  military  expedition  has 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


357 


been  fitted  out  from  our  territory  against  Mexico.  It  appears 
from  the  newspaper  report  that  Texans  are  engaged  in  the 
fight,  but  whether  they  meet  this  as  an  organized  military 
body  or  individuals  does  not  appear. 

The  Mexican  Minister  has,  however,  requested  that  a 
proclamation  should  be  issued,  because  it  was  done  to  pre- 
vent the  Cuban  expedition.  The  cases  are  by  no  means 
parallel,  and  I doubt  some  the  policy  of  issuing  these  procla- 
mations too  often.  When  the  public  mind  becomes  familiar- 
ized to  them,  they  lose  their  effect  as  a warning  to  prevent 
crime.  Still,  there  is  danger  that  Mexico  may  feel  jealous 
if  not  done,  and  may,  if  the  revolution  should  prove  success- 
ful, distrust  the  sincerity  of  our  friendship.  I shall,  how- 
ever, consider  and  settle  it  in  Cabinet  council  to  day. 

Since  writing  the  foregoing  the  Cabinet  has  met  and  we 
have  concluded  that  there  is  not  sufficient  information  of  an 
intent  to  violate  our  laws  to  justify  a proclamation  at  this 
time. 

Since  I wrote  you  before  I learn  that  the  French  minister 
has  intimated,  rather  reluctantly,  that  his  government  had 
issued  similar  orders  to  its  fleet  in  the  West  Indies,  to  those 
issued  by  Great  Britain  in  reference  to  Cuba.  A despatch 
from  Mr.  Rives,  states  a conversation  with  the  secy  of  For- 
eign Affairs,  in  which  he  denied  all  intention  of  interference 
by  the  French  government. 

This  presents  a singular  state  of  things,  and  looks  as 
though  there  was  a little  -finessing  between  G.  Britain  and 
France,  to  court  favor  with  Spain,  and  if  possible  not  offend 
us,  or  at  least  it  looks  as  though  France  intended  this. 

Joseph  Blunt  of  N.  York,  whom  you  must  know,  a law- 
yer and  batchellor  [sic]  and  author  of  the  Historical  Regis- 
ter, and  a work  on  commercial  law  desires  some  foreign 
appointment.  Would  it  not  be  best  to  offer  him  China.  I 
think  him  every  way  qualified  except  perhaps  a want  of 
knowledge  of  foreign  languages,  and  I can  not  say  he  has 
met  this : He  is  the  best  man  I can  think  of  for  this  place. 

Our  weather  is  uncommonly  fine  and  I wish  you  were 
here  to  enjoy  it. 


358 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


Mr.  Corwin  has  concluded  to  remain  till  the  meeting  of 
Congress,  and  I trust  that  by  that  time  he  will  see  no  occa- 
sion to  leave. 

I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

P.  S.  I enclose  an  article  from  the  Republic  of  this 
morning  which  does  you  good  justice  and  no  more. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


A NAVAL  COMMAND. 

[Washington,  Nov.  i i. ? 1851.] 

[To  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy.] 

I do  not  understand  Capt.  Dulany  as  objecting  to  the 
command  to  which  he  is  now  ordered  but  he  desires  some 
assurance  that  junior  officers  shall  not  be  placed  in  command 
of  a fleet  in  preference  to  himself,  because  of  this  service. 
It  appears  to  me  that  each  selection  should  be  made  when 
the  exigency  arises  requiring  it  and  that  the  department 
should  not  be  tramelled  by  any  previous  committment.  It 
must  be  presumed  that  when  a vacancy  occurs,  if  under  all 
the  circumstances  Capt.  D.  is  the  proper  person,  that  he 
will  be  selected.  But  I think  no  assurance  should  be  given 
in  advance  to  any  officer.  Please  notify  the  Capt.  of  this 
decision. 

Millard  Fillmore. 

P.  S.  I return  all  the  papers. 


Navy  Department. 

The  foregoing  letter  was  written  by  President  Fillmore  on  the  back  of  a 
letter  from  William  A.  Graham,  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  dated  November  io, 
1851,  in  which  the  Secretary  states  his  reply  to  a request  from  Captain  Bladen 
Dulany,  who  on  November  7,  1851,  applied  for  a change  in  command.  There 
are  also  filed  with  the  above  in  the  Navy  Department  several  letters,  being 
correspondence  between  Captain  Dulany  and  the  Department,  to  one  of  which 
a note  of  reference  has  been  added  by  the  President. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


359 


APPARENT  TREATY  VIOLATION. 

[Washington],  Dec.  7,  1851. 

Secretary  of  State, 

My  dear  Sir  : I cut  the  enclosed  from  an  editorial  of  the 
N.  Y.  Herald  yesterday.  It  seems  to  me  to  be  in  direct  vio- 
lation of  the  treaty.  Is  there  any  information  on  the  subject 
in  the  State  Dept.  ? 

Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


[Extract.] 

It  is  highly  desirable,  and  it  is  high  time  to  have  an  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Nicaragua  treaty.  It  either  means  something  or  nothing. 
That  the  British  agents  in  Nicaragua  regard  it  as  a dead  letter,  we 
have  the  satisfactory  proof  in  the  late  outrage  and  in  the  author- 
ity upon  which  it  was  committed.  We  have  upon  our  table  a 
pamphlet,  entitled  “Municipal  Ordinances,  for  the  government  and 
regulation  of  the  city  and  port  of  Greytown,  in  the  kingdom  of 
Mosquito ; also,  the  harbor  regulations  and  schedule  of  port  charges, 
as  adopted  by  the  City  Council  of  Greytown.  Printed  by  J.  de 
Cordova,  Kingdom,  Jamaica,  1851.”  The  preamble  to  this  pamphlet 
is  as  follows: 

“Whereas,  On  the  15th  day  of  April,  Anno  Domini,  1851,  at 
Greytown,  in  the  kingdom  of  Mosquito,  did  assemble,  at  the  request 
of  his  Majesty’s  agent,  James  Green,  Esq.,  her  Britannic  Majesty’s 
Acting  Agent  and  Consul  General,  the  house-holders,  residents  of 
the  said  town ; and  in  public  Convention  did  agree  to  a town  gov- 
ernment for  Greytown,  upon  the  following  basis,”  etc. 

Then  follows  a statement  of  the  election  of  the  five  aldermen  of 
the  corporation,  who  were  sworn  in  by  her  Majesty’s  agent,  and 
the  validity  of  this  organization  is  certified  by  James  Green,  Chair- 
man, the  Council.  The  city  constitution  and  the  laws  and  regulations 
of  the  port,  bear  the  same  endorsement  of  ratification. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


GIVING  A REFERENCE  TO  VATTEL. 

Dec.  11,  ’51. 

To  the  Secretary  of  State  : 

My  dear  Sir  : In  answer  to  your  note  I would  say  that 
my  edition  of  Vattel  is  1849. 


360 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


Chap.  19  treats  on  the  subject,  at  page  100- 103.  In  Sec- 
tions 218-220  & note  b.  to  the  latter. 

Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

See  also  Wharton's  State  trials,  p.  89  for  Jefferson’s  let- 
ter to  Mr.  Morris.  Same  3 Jefferson’s  Corr.  271. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


WELCOME  TO  KOSSUTH. 


Dec.  16  [1851]. 

The  President  herewith  transmits  the  Hon.  Secy  of  State 
the  joint  resolution  of  welcome  to  Kossuth. 

The  President  would  suggest  that  a copy  be  sent  by  the 
chief  clerk  or  special  messenger,  and  that  the  letter  express 
simply  his  cordial  concurrence  in  the  Resolution. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 

Autograph  letter,  in  pencil,  but  not  signed. 


“confidential.” 

The  President  desires  to  see  the  Secretary  of  State  on  a 
confidential  matter  and  will  call  at  his  convenience. 

Friday  1 P.  M.  Jany.  9 [1852]. 

Webster  collection.  Library  of  Congress. 

Autograph  letter,  not  signed. 


OUR  ATTITUDE  TOWARD  FRANCE. 

January  12  [?i852]. 

The  President  has  the  honor  herewith  to  return  to  the 
Secretary  of  State  his  despatch  No.  38  to  our  Minister  at 
Paris,  with  his  approbation  of  its  general  tenor.  But  begs 
leave  to  suggest  that  a sentence  be  marked  on  the  3d  page, 
would  seem  to  convey  the  idea  that  the  United  States  would 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


361 


not  consider  a government  as  lawfully  established  unless  it 
was  founded  by  the  consent  of  the  people.  This  may  not  be 
material  in  this  case  as  the  people  seem  to  have  ratified  the 
Revolution ; but  is  the  sentiment  quite  correct  ? Do  we  ever 
require  more  than  that  implied  assent,  which  is  to  be  in- 
ferred merely  from  the  stability  of  the  new  government,  and 
its  apparent  power  to  maintain  itself?  and  would  not  any 
scrutiny  beyond  this  to  ascertain  whether  it  was  founded  by 
the  consent  of  the  people  be  difficult  and  inconvenient?  I 
make  these  suggestions  because  this  despatch  will  undoubt- 
edly form  a model  for  all  despatches  hereafter  in  similar 
cases ; and  some  may  arise  where  the  government  is  per- 
manent, but  was  not  founded  by  the  consent  of  the  people. 
If  I am  right  in  these  suggestions,  the  sentence  might  be 
transposed  so  as  to  read, 

'‘Whatever  form  of  government  may  exist  in  a country 
which  appears  to  be  settled  and  permanent,  or  which  as  in 
this  case  has  received  the  sanction  of  the  people,  the  United 
States  regard  as  legitimately  established.” 

Quere?  Will  not  the  allusion  to  wars  and  bloodshed  to 
establish  liberty,  and  the  failure  of  the  object,  as  mentioned 
on  the  4th  page,  give  unnecessary  offence  to  the  French  gov- 
ernment and  nation  ? 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 

Autograph  letter,  not  signed. 


ADDRESS  OF  THE  BALTIMORE  COMMITTEE. 

Washington,  Jany.  22,  1852. 

To  the  Secretary  of  State, 

My  dear  Sir  : I received  the  inclosed  copy  of  the  address 
of  the  Baltimore  Committee  just  as  I was  retiring  to  bed 
at  11,  last  night. 

I think  you  had  better  draft  an  answer,  and  say  by  the 
bearer  when  you  can  have  it  ready,  and  I will  call  a meeting 
of  the  Cabinet. 


362 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


I will  see  you  at  your  office  if  you  will  let  me  know  when 
you  come. 


Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


RELATING  TO  REMOVAL  OF  A JUDGE. 

The  President  has  the  honor  to  enclose  to  the  Secretary 
of  State  a copy  of  the  Atty.  Gen’s  opinion  as  to  the  power 
to  remove  the  Territorial  Judge  in  Minnesota,  requested  by 
the  Judiciary  committee  of  the  Senate  and  would  be  glad  to 
have  the  Secretary  add  any  suggestions  or  arguments  of 
his  own. 

Jany.  24  [? 1852]. 

Webster  collection.  Library  of  Congress. 

Autograph  note,  not  signed. 


RELATING  TO  FUGITIVE  SLAVES. 

Washington  City,  April  17th,  1852. 
The  Attorney  General, 

My  dear  Sir:  Some  time  in  March,  1851,  an  application 
was  made  to  me  to  pardon  Daniel  Drayton  and  Edward 
Sears,  convicted  in  this  District  of  assisting  slaves  to  escape. 
My  impression  is  that  I referred  the  papers  to  you  for  a 
legal  opinion  on  the  power  of  the  Executive  to  grant  a par- 
don in  such  a case.  The  application  is  again  renewed  and 
on  inquiry  at  the  State  Department  the  papers  cannot  be 
found,  but  according  to  my  recollection  they  were  convicted 
of  the  offence  under  an  old  law  of  Maryland  by  which  they 
were  subject  to  a fine  for  each  slave,  one  half  to  the  use  of 
the  master  and  the  other  share  to  some  charitable  institu- 
tion, and  that  the  amount  of  this  fine  was  some  fourteen 
thousand  dollars  and  that  they  were  to  stand  committed 
until  it  was  paid.  If  I am  right  in  this  state  of  facts,  which 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


363 


you  will  be  able  to  ascertain  from  the  papers  if  they  are 
with  you,  I then  wish  your  opinion  on  the  constitutional 
power  of  the  Executive  to  grant  a pardon  which  shall  release 
these  convicts  from  their  liability  to  pay  this  fine  to  the  use 
of  the  owner  of  the  slaves  and  the  benefit  of  the  charitable 
institution.  And  in  determining  this  matter  I should  like 
also  your  opinion  on  the  question,  Whether  this  conviction 
deprives  the  owner  of  the  slaves  of  his  civil  action  for  the 
injury  which  he  has  sustained;  and,  Whether,  if  I grant  a 
pardon,  which  releases  the  convicts  from  imprisonment,  a 
civil  action  could  be  maintained  by  the  master  against  the 
convict  on  the  adjudication  in  this  criminal  prosecution. 
These  latter  questions  are  only  material  in  case  I have  the 
power  to  grant  a pardon  at  all. 

I shall  be  happy  to  have  your  opinion  on  the  subject  at 
your  earliest  convenience. 

I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Crittenden  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


TO  HEAD  OFF  FILIBUSTERS. 

Washington  City,  May  17th,  1852. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Navy, 

My  dear  Sir:  I have  just  issued  an  authority  to  Hugh 
Maxwell,  Collector  at  New  York,  under  the  8th  section  of 
the  Act  of  April  20,  1818,  to  arrest  any  unlawful  expedition 
that  may  be  attempted  to  be  fitted  out  within  his  district, 
and  I have  given  him  power  to  call  upon  any  military  and 
naval  officers,  that  may  be  there,  to  aid  him  in  the  execution 
of  this  duty,  and  I will  thank  you  to  issue  the  necessary  in- 
structions to  the  Naval  officer  in  that  district. 

I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Navy  Department. 


364 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


A CABINET  CALL. 

The  President  respectfully  requests  the  Secretary  of  State 
to  attend  the  Cabinet  Meeting  today  at  12  o’clock. 

[By  a Secretary .] 

May  31,  1852. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


AN  APPLICATION. 

Washington  City,  May  17,  1852. 

My  dear  Sir:  I herewith  return  Mr.  Heap’s  letter,  which 
you  handed  me  this  morning,  and  shall  give  his  application 
due  consideration. 

I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Robert  Beale,  Esq., 

Sergeant  at  Arms  to  the  Senate. 

Collection,  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania. 


ISSUES  DISCUSSED  WITH  THE  SECRETARY  OF  STATE. 

Washington  City,  May  20th,  1852. 
[To  Daniel  Webster] 

My  dear  Sir:  Yours  of  the  12th  inst.  came  duly  to  hand, 
but  I have  delayed  answering  it,  for  the  purpose  of  seeing 
a translation  of  Mr.  Hiilsemann’s  letter,  which  I did  not  get 
until  yesterday.  I am  exceedingly  gratified  to  learn  that 
your  injury  was  not  so  severe  but  that  we  may  soon  hope  to 
see  you  with  us  again.  The  anecdote,  which  you  relate  of 
your  old  friend  who  watched  you  so  intently  in  the  moment 
of  danger,  is  truly  touching,  and  the  graphic  manner  in 
which  you  have  described  it  presents  a scene,  which  would 
form  a beautiful  subject  for  a painting.  It  must  have  been 
some  gratification,  at  least,  amid  your  afflictions  to  witness 
the  universal  sympathy  at  your  misfortune,  and  the  deep 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


365 


interest  which  everyone  took  in  your  recovery.  I perceive, 
by  the  papers,  that  you  are  soon  to  speak  at  Faneuil  Hall, 
and  I therefore  infer,  that,  with  the  exception  of  your  hands 
and  arms,  you  are  quite  recovered. 

In  regard  to  a further  reply  to  Mr.  Hulsemann’s  letter 
we  will  consider  of  that  when  you  return.  My  own  impres- 
sion is,  however,  that  the  most  dignified  as  well  as  expedient 
course  for  us,  will  be,  to  limit  the  reply  or  communication 
to  Mr.  McCurdy  to  that  part  of  it  which  complains  of  the 
disclosure  of  his  communications  by  the  State  Department. 
Mr.  Bodisco  expressed  a doubt  to  me  whether  he  is  the 
“Hulsemann,”  the  Author  of  the  Travels  in  America,  which 
were  so  justly  and  severely  criticised  in  the  North  American 
Reviezv.  But  whether  he  be  or  not,  it  seems  to  me  that  he  is 
hardly  worth,  as  you  say,  “a  discharge  of  the  lower  tier,” 
and  it  might  serve  further  to  irritate  the  Austrian  Govern- 
ment, with  which  it  is  our  interest,  if  possible,  to  be  on  good 
terms. 

The  Mexican  Minister  has  not  yet  been  received,  but 
probably  will  be  on  Saturday.  I have  a copy  of  his  address, 
which  is  quite  general  with  warm  professions  of  friendship 
and  a desire  to  maintain  amicable  relations  between  the  two 
Governments.  I am  a little  apprehensive,  from  what  Presi- 
dent Arista  says  in  his  letter  to  me,  that  Mr.  Letcher  went 
farther  than  was  intended,  in  threatening  the  Mexican 
Government  with  an  interruption  of  our  peaceful  relations 
in  case  she  did  not  ratify  the  treaty.  By  assuming  to  treat 
with  her,  we  certainly  conceded,  that  she  had  a right  either 
to  adopt  or  reject  the  treaty.  It  was  our  duty,  as  well  to 
the  Tehuantepec  Company  as  to  the  United  States,  to  make 
every  reasonable  effort  to  secure  this  right  of  way  and  pro- 
tect whatever  rights  the  Company  might  have  under  the 
Garay  grant,  but  the  rights  of  the  Company,  like  the  rights 
of  every  other  contractor  with  a foreign  nation,  or  its  sub- 
jects, are  rights  growing  out  of  a private  contract,  and  if 
the  Mexican  government  refuses  to  fulfill  that  contract,  the 
proprietors  doubtless  have  a claim  for  pecuniary  indemnity, 
but  that  is  to  be  settled,  like  every  other  claim  of  this  kind 


366 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


that  our  citizens  may  have  against  a foreign  government. 
President  Arista  insists,  that  they  are  willing  to  grant  the 
right  of  way  to  our  citizens,  or  others,  who  will  construct 
the  railroad.  But  I infer,  that  the  great  objection  to  the 
Garay  grant  consists  in  the  fact,  that  a large  territory  was 
granted  with  it,  on  each  side  of  the  proposed  railroad,  and 
a much  larger  territory  was  to  be  open  to  colonization,  and 
that  the  Mexicans  were  justly  apprehensive,  that  if  the 
Americans  established  so  large  a colony  on  the  Southern 
boarders  of  their  territory,  that  it  might  turn  out  to  be  an- 
other Texan  colony  which  would  involve  their  nation  in  war, 
and  might  result  in  another  annexation ; and,  considering 
what  has  passed,  these  apprehensions  were  not  unreasonable. 
Since  you  left,  Mr.  Hargous  has  submitted'  a proposition  on 
the  subject,  which  if  adopted  by  the  Administration,  and 
sanctioned  by  Congress,  would,  I doubt  not,  finally  result 
in  a war  between  the  two  countries.  Certainly  nothing  has 
been  left  undone,  that  could  have  been  done,  to  secure  the 
rights  of  the  Company,  and  guarantee  them  by  a treaty 
between  Mexico  and  the  United  States ; but  the  treaty  has 
failed,  and  under  such  circumstances,  that  I am  satisfied, 
that  it  can  never  be  ratified,  and  I shall  therefore  now  wait 
to  see  what  propositions  the  new  Mexican  minister  is  author- 
ized to  make,  and  I doubt  not  you  will  be  here  before  it  is 
necessary  to  consider  them. 

I handed  your  letter  to  Mr.  Hunter  that  he  might  copy 
for  you  that  part  of  it  which  you  desire.  The  weather  is 
yet  quite  cool,  and  a fire  is  not  uncomfortable  in  the  morn- 
ing. It  would  be  agreeable  at  all  times  to  have  you  here, 
and  especially  at  the  Council  board,  but  yet  there  is  nothing 
particularly  pressing,  and  I beg  of  you,  to  make  yourself 
contented  and  happy,  without  any  unnecessary  anxiety  about 
matters  here,  until  you  shall  feel  yourself  perfectly  restored 
and  able  to  return,  when  I shall  be  most  happy  to  welcome 

y°u’  I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 

“The  Letters  of  Daniel  Webster  . . . edited  by  C.  H.  Van  Tyne," 

PP-  S27,  528. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


367 


DELINQUENCY  OF  LIEUT.  SUTHERLAND. 

Washington  City,  June  3rd,  1852. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Navy, 

My  dear  Sir  : I have  the  honor  herewith  to  inclose  you 

a report  of  the  Fourth  Auditor,  received  through  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury,  stating  the  delinquents  under  the 
Act  of  January  31st,  1823.  I beg  leave  to  call  your  atten- 
tion to  the  delinquency  of  Mr.  Sutherland,  and  shall  be 
happy  to  have  your  advice  in  reference  to  that,  or  any  other 
delinquency,  under  the  act  of  January  31st,  1823. 

I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Navy  Department. 

There  are  other  letters  from  the  Treasury  Department  to  the  Navy  Depart- 
ment on  this  matter.  One  of  June  8,  1852,  was  referred  to  the  President  and 
bears  his  endorsement:  “Have  steps  been  taken  to  compel  a settlement  of  this 

account?  M.  F.” 

Lieut.  J.  D.  Sutherland  of  the  Navy  was  acting  as  Paymaster  of  the 
Marine  Corps  at  the  time  mentioned.  The  Fourth  Auditor  referred  to  above 
was  A.  O.  Dayton;  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  Thomas  Corwin. 


DEATH  OF  HENRY  CLAY. 

Washington  City, 

Tuesday  I2j4  o’clock  P.  M.,  June  29th,  1852. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Navy. 

Sir:  The  tolling  bells  announce  the  death  of  the  Hon. 

Henry  Clay.  Though  this  event  has  been  long  anticipated, 
yet  the  painful  bereavement  could  never  be  fully  realized.  I 
am  sure  all  hearts  are  too  sad  at  this  moment  to  attend 
to  business  and  I therefore  respectfully  suggest  that  your 
Department  be  closed  for  the  remainder  of  the  day. 

I have  the  honor  to  be 

Your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Navy  Department. 

This  letter  is  followed  by  the  order  of  Secretary  Graham  closing  the 
Department  as  suggested. 


368 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


RESIGNATION  OF  SECRETARY  GRAHAM. 

Executive  Mansion,  Washington  City,  June  30th,  1852. 

Sir  : I received  last  evening  with  unfeigned  regret,  your 

letter  of  the  28th  inst.,  tendering  your  resignation  as  Secre- 
tary of  the  Navy.  Our  official  intercourse  has  been  so  inti- 
mate and  so  entirely  harmonious  that  it  seems  like  parting 
with  one  of  my  own  family  to  lose  you  from  the  Council 
Board ; and  I am  quite  sure  that  every  member  of  the  Cabi- 
net will  share  with  me  in  this  feeling. 

I owe  you  many  thanks  for  the  able,  faithful  and  impar- 
tial manner  in  which  you  have  administered  your  depart- 
ment ; and  I take  this  occasion  to  say  that  your  official  con- 
duct has  at  all  times  met  my  entire  approval. 

I appreciate,  most  fully,  the  high  sense  of  delicacy  and 
propriety  on  your  part  which  induces  you  to  separate  from 
the  Administration  at  this  time,  lest  it  might  be  embarrassed 
by  your  connection  with  it  in  the  coming  contest.  I can  not 
regret  the  cause  which  compels  you  to  this  act  however  I 
may  regret  the  act  itself.  It  would  have  been  gratifying  to 
me,  if  the  Constitutional  advisers  with  whom  I commenced 
my  administration,  and  who  have  acted  so  cordially  together, 
could  have  remained  a unit  in  person  and  sentiment  until 
its  close.  But  fate  and  the  sovereign  people  have  ordered 
otherwise.  I yield  to  the  necessity  of  the  case,  and  shall, 
but  not  without  great  reluctance,  comply  with  your  request 
by  accepting  your  resignation  as  soon  as  I can  find  a suc- 
cessor to  supply  your  place. 

Hoping  that  the  Country  may  appreciate  your  merits  as 
I have  done  and  reward  you  accordingly,  I remain 
Your  sincere  friend, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Hon.  W.  A.  Graham, 

Secy,  of  Navy. 


Navy  Department,  letter-book. 

See  letter,  same  to  same,  July  24,  1852. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


369 


COMPLAINT  AGAINST  THE  FIRST  COMPTROLLER. 

Washington  City,  July  6th,  1852. 
Hon.  John  J.  Crittenden, 

Attorney  General: 

My  dear  Sir  : I have  received  from  Alderman  [ J. 

Franklin]  Reigart  of  Lancaster  City,  Pennsylvania,  a letter 
complaining  most  bitterly  of  the  conduct  of  the  First  Comp- 
troller, Mr.  Whittlesey,  in  not  allowing  to  the  full  extent 
his  and  other  claims  upon  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States 
for  alleged  services  in  arresting  the  reputed  murderers  of 
Mr.  Gorsuch  at  Christiana.  I felt  it  my  duty  to  refer  the 
letter  at  once  to  the  First  Comptroller  for  consideration  and 
report;  and  I have  just  received  his  report  on  the  subject, 
dated  on  the  29th  ult.,  accompanied  by  voluminous  copies 
of  letters  and  accounts,  numbered  from  one  to  four  inclu- 
sive, all  of  which,  together  with  the  Alderman’s  letter,  I 
respectfully  refer  to  you.  It  appears  by  the  report  of  Mr. 
Whittlesey,  which  I have  read,  that  you  have  had  some 
knowledge  of  this  affair  heretofore,  and  I have  not  time 
to  go  through  with  the  documents  which  accompany  the 
report.  Will  you  therefore  do  me  the  favor  to  examine  the 
whole,  and  give  me  your  opinion  as  to  whether  the  First 
Comptroller  has,  or  has  not,  faithfully  discharged  his  duty 
in  the  premises,  andi  if  he  has  not,  please  to  specify  in  what 
particular  he  has  failed  to  do  so.  Your  report  on  this  sub- 
ject at  your  earliest  convenience  will  much  oblige 

Your  obt.  servt.,  Millard  Fillmore. 

Attorney  General’s  Office,  Department  of  Justice. 

The  papers  mentioned  are  filed  with  this  letter  in  the  Attorney  General’s 
office,  Department  of  Justice,  but  Crittenden’s  report  is  not  with  them. 


THE  LOBOS  ISLANDS  CONTENTION. 

Washington  City,  July  8th,  1852. 
Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

Secretary  of  State,  Boston,  Mass. 

My  dear  Sir  : Messrs.  Crampton  and  Sartiges  asked  an 

interview  which  I granted  day  before  yesterday,  at  which 


370 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


they  renewed  their  former  suggestions  in  reference  to  Cuba. 
I found  they  had  misunderstood  our  views  as  to  the  proper 
time  for  considering  this  subject,  and  I repeated  them,  with 
which  they  appeared  to  be  satisfied.  Mr.  Crampton  has 
today  addressed  a note  on  the  subject  to  the  Department, 
which  I have  just  read.  It  is  merely  an  argument  a little 
more  in  extenso  than  his  verbal  communication  in  favor  of 
the  proposition  which  France  and  England  had  submitted. 
It  occurs  to  me,  on  further  reflection,  that  the  Sandwich 
Islands  are  likely  to  present  about  the  same  difficulty  as 
Cuba,  and  that  whenever  the  subject  is  taken  up  for  con- 
sideration it  might  be  advisable  to  consider  and  settle  both 
at  the  same  time.  Please  think  of  this  subject,  and  give  me 
your  views.  There  will  be  ample  time  to  consider  the  whole 
before  we  shall  be  called  upon  to  act. 

Mr.  Hunter  has  sent  up  the  draft  of  a reply  to  the  Peru- 
vian Minister’s  note  on  the  subject  of  the  islands  of  Lobos. 
I confess  that  I have  some  doubts,  whether  the  partial  occu- 
pation of  the  islands  by  the  inhabitants  of  Peru  for  fishing, 
hunting,  and  gathering  eggs,  and  the  assumption  by  the 
state  to  regulate  these  subjects  by  legislation,  as  alleged  in 
the  Peruvian  Minister’s  note,  if  true,  has  not  given  to  Peru 
a better  claim  to  these  islands  than  can  be  possessed  by  other 
nations.  Perhaps  I am  a little  over-scrupulous  on  this  sub- 
ject, in  consequence  of  the  weakness  of  Peru  to  defend  her 
rights.  I shall  be  very  unwilling  to  exact  from  her  what  I 
would  be  unwilling  to  claim,  under  similar  circumstances, 
from  Great  Britain  or  France;  and  I wish  to  take  no  posi- 
tion on  this  subject  that  shall  be  either  unjust  before  the 
world,  or  from  which  I may  be  compelled  to  recede  hereafter. 
It  is  true  that  the  islands  do  not  lie  within  a marine  league  of 
the  Peruvian  coast ; consequently,  their  proximity  is  not  such 
as  to  make  them  a part  of  the  Peruvian  Republic.  I know 
not  that  she  claims  anything  as  first  discoverer,  but  even 
such  claim  can  amount  to  nothing,  unless  it  be  followed  by 
occupation  or  possession.  In  this  case  it  is  manifest  that 
the  islands  themselves  are  uninhabitable,  and  perhaps  it  is 
equally  clear  that  the  Peruvians  have  occupied  them  in  the 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


371 


only  way  they  are  susceptible  of  occupation, — that  is,  by 
occasional  visits  to  them  for  hunting,  fishing,  &c.,  and  the 
assertion  of  a right  to  control  them  by  legislation.  The 
question,  therefore,  narrows  itself  to  this; — Can  any  one 
nation  appropriate  a barren  desert  island  to  its  own  use, 
which  is  uninhabitable  for  want  of  water,  by  occasionally 
occupying  it  for  specified  objects  of  a brief  and  transient 
character?  If  it  can,  then  I think  Peru  has-  an  exclusive 
right  to  control  these  islands,  but  if  not,  then  they  must, 
like  the  ocean,  be  deemed  common  property  to  all  nations, 
to  be  used  by  each  for  its  own  convenience  in  such  a way 
as  not  to  prejudice  the  rights  of  all  others.  The  latter  I 
perceive  is  contemplated  by  your  reply  to  the  Peruvian  Min- 
ister, but  I shall  withhold  it,  until  I hear  further  from  you 
on  the  subject.  l am  your  obt  servt 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Collections,  New  Hampshire  Historical  Society,  Concord,  N.  H. 


BRITISH  ATTITUDE  AS  TO  THE  LOBOS  ISLANDS. 

Washington  City,  July  16th,  1852. 
Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

My  dear  Sir:  I received  yesterday  three  letters  from 

you,  all  dated  at  Franklin,  N.  H.,  on  the  13th  inst.,  and  am 
gratified  to  learn  that  you  have  reached  that  cool  retreat 
without  accident,  and  that  you  seem  to  be  enjoying  the 
scenery  of  your  early  days  with  a relish  that  few  can  appre- 
ciate. I am  pleased  to  see  that  the  Bostonians  have  honored 
themselves,  in  honoring  you,  by  a splendid  and  cordial  recep- 
tion. It  is  quite  manifest  that  a change  has  come  over  the 
spirit  of  their  dreams  within  the  past  year. 

The  Mexican  Minister  has  replied  to  your  last  note  to 
him,  as  I am  informed,  that  he  has  no  propositions  to  submit, 
but  as  his  letter  is  not  yet  translated  I have  not  seen  it.  I 
think  the  Senate  will,  in  a few  days  call  for  the  whole  cor- 
respondence, and  as  the  matter  may  now  be  considered  as 
closed,  I see  no  objection  to  giving  it  to  them.  They  have 


372 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


just  called  for  Mr.  Walsh’s  correspondence,  in  reference  to 
Hayti.  I wish  you  would  consider  seriously  what  objections 
there  may  be  to  the  recognition  of  the  independence  of 
Hayti  and  the  Dominican  Republic  and  of  Liberia.  Some 
treaty  stipulations'  would  greatly  facilitate  our  growing 
commerce  with  these  places. 

We  have  just  received  the  correspondence  transmitted  to 
Parliament,  in  reference  to  the  Lobos  islands,  which  extends 
from  the  years  ’32  to  ’52.  I have  glanced  at  it,  and  find 
that  the  British  Government  was  strongly  pressed  by  the 
commercial  and  agricultural  interests  to  take  the  ground, 
that  Peru  had  no  exclusive  right  to  those  islands,  and  that 
all  nations  had  an  equal  right  to  take  guano  from  them,  and 
they  asked  that  their  merchant  vessels  might  be  protected 
by  a man  of  war  in  the  exercise  of  this  right ; but  the  Gov- 
ernment refused  to  grant  the  request,  considering  that  Peru 
had  a claim  with  which  England  had  no  right  to  interfere. 
Under  Secretary  Lord  Stanley  expressing  the  views  of  Lord 
Palmerston  in  his  letter  of  May  10th,  1851,  says:  “His 

Lordship  does  not  find  in  the  Peruvian  Constitutions  pub- 
lished after  Peru  had  separated  itself  from  Spain,  any  men- 
tion of  those  islands  as  being  dependencies  of  Peru ; but  it 
appears  to  Lord  Palmerston  that  their  proximity  to  Peru 
would  give  to  that  state  a prima  facie  claim  to  them. 

“But  be  this  as  it  may,  Lord  Palmerston  fears  that  there 
is  no  ground  upon  which  the  British  Government  would  be 
justified  in  claiming  for  British  subjects  the  right  to  appro- 
priate at  their  pleasure  the  guano  to  be  found  on  those 
islands.” 

The  same  sentiment  was  reiterated  by  Under  Secretary 
Addington  as  late  as  April  26th,  1852.  You  may  desire 
to  see  this  document  before  you  reply  to  the  Peruvian  Min- 
ister’s letter. 

I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

Secretary  of  State , Boston , Mass. 

Collections,  New  Hampshire  Historical  Society,  Concord,  N.  H. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


373 


ONONDAGA  SALT. 

Washington  City,  July  17th,  1852. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Navy, 

My  dear  Sir:  Will  you  be  so  kind  as  to  refer  Mr.  [N.] 

Randall’s  letter,  addressed  to  me,  which  I sent  to  your 
Department,  requesting  that  provisions  might  be  packed  in 
Onondaga  solar  salt,  to  the  Secretary  of  War  for  a report 
from  his  Department  upon  the  same  subject.  I have  received 
your  report  and  shall  forward  it  to  Mr.  Randall. 

I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Navy  Department. 

Endorsed:  “Done  July  19.” 

The  Secretary  of  War  acknowledged  the  receipt  of  the  above  on  July 
24.  1852,  and  returned  the  letter  of  Randall  at  that  time.  See  Fillmore  to 
Graham,  June  17,  1851. 


OUR  FISHERMEN  OFF  NEWFOUNDLAND. 

Washington  City,  July  20th,  1852. 

Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

Secretary  of  State. 

My  dear  Sir:  Your  note  of  the  17th  dated  at  Frank- 
lin came  to  hand  this  morning,  inclosing  a copy  of  yours  of 
the  same  date  to  Mr.  Crampton,  and  Mr.  Hunter  has  shown 
me  your  telegraphic  despatch  of  yesterday,  requesting  him 
to  ask  me  whether  it  was  not  best  to  send  one  of  our  naval 
ships  to  Newfoundland  to  look  after  the  disturbances  among 
the  fishermen.  I have  also  perused  your  article  in  the  Bos- 
ton Courier  of  yesterday,  and  sincerely  hope  that  these  dif- 
ficulties will  not  prove  as  serious  as  you  seem  to  anticipate. 
I have  seen  Mr.  Crampton  who  informs  me  that  he  will  leave 
for  Boston  to-morrow  morning,  for  the  purpose  of  having  a 
consultation  with  you  upon  the  subject  of  the  fisheries.  He 
informs  me  also,  that  he  has  addressed  a circular  to  the 
several  governors  of  the  British  Provinces  of  North  America 
advising  moderation  and  forbearance  upon  this  subject.  I 


374 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


doubt  not  that  when  you  and  he  meet  you  will  be  able  to 
agree  upon  some  line  of  proceeding  that  will  allay  the  pres- 
ent excitement  and  prevent  any  bloodshed. 

I would  suggest  that  you  unite  in  a publication  in  which 
you  should  express  your  regrets  that  any  misunderstanding 
had  arisen  between  our  fishermen  engaged  in  the  fisheries 
at  Newfoundland,  and  the  colonial  subjects  of  Great  Britain ; 
that  the  differences  of  opinion  which  have  arisen  between 
the  two  governments,  in  reference  to  their  respective  rights 
under  the  Convention  of  1818,  have  called  the  attention  of 
both  Governments  to  the  subject,  and  that  together  with  the 
subject  of  reciprocal  trade  between  Her  Majestys  Provinces 
of  North  America  and  the  United  States,  will  doubtless 
become  the  immediate  subject  of  negotiation  between  the 
two  countries ; that  in  the  mean  time  and  until  these  matters 
can  be  amicably  adjusted  you  both  concur  in  the  opinion 
that  under  the  Treaty  of  1818  our  citizens  had  the  unques- 
tioned right  of  fishing  on  the  southern  and  western  Shore 
of  the  island  of  Newfoundland,  lying  between  the  islands 
of  Ramea  on  the  south  and  the  island  of  Quiperon  on  the 
North,  and  of  entering  upon  any  unoccupied  lands  upon 
the  shore  of  said  island  between  Cape  Ray  and  said  island 
of  Ramea,  for  the  purpose  of  drying  and  curing  fish;  and 
also  of  fishing  upon  the  shores  of  the  Magdalen  island ; and 
with  regard  to  all  the  rest  of  the  island  of  Newfoundland, 
and  the  other  islands  and  main  land  of  Nova  Scotia  and 
New  Brunswick,  the  English  Government,  so  far  as  they 
have  not  conceded  it  to  the  French,  have  the  exclusive  right 
of  fishing  in  all  the  waters  adjacent  to  such  islands  or  main 
land  and  within  three  marine  miles  of  the  Shore ; but  as  for 
those  waters  in  the  several  bays  and  harbors  which  are  more 
than  three  marine  miles  from  the  shore  of  such  bay  or  har- 
bor upon  either  side,  and  within  three  marine  miles  of  a 
straight  line  drawn  from  one  head  land  to  the  other  of  such 
bay  or  harbor,  that  you  as  the  representative  of  the  United 
States  conceived  that  our  fishermen  have  the  right  under 
the  treaty  to  fish  therein,  but  the  British  Government  having 
held  that  by  a true  construction  of  the  Treaty  such  right 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


375 


belonged  exclusively  to  British  subjects,  and  as  those  waters 
were  thus  in  dispute  between  the  two  nations,  you  respect- 
ively advised  the  citizens  and  subjects  of  both  countries  not 
to  attempt  to  exercise  any  right  that  either  claimed  within 
the  disputed  waters  until  this  disputed  right  could  be  ad- 
justed by  amicable  negotiation. 

I perceive  by  the  papers  that  your  publication  in  the 
Boston  Courier  is  somewhat  misunderstood,  and  has  conse- 
quently created  unnecessary  alarm;  and  some  such  joint 
publication  as  I have  suggested  above  will,  I think,  quiet  the 
apprehensions  of  the  country,  and  be  generally  acquiesced 
in  and  obeyed  by  the  parties  engaged  in  the  fisheries.  I do 
not,  of  course,  intend  to  indicate  the  precise  words  of  such 
a declaration,  as  I write  in  much  haste,  and  you  are  much 
more  competent  to  prepare  the  article  than  I am.  As  to  the 
subjects  of  negotiation,  beyond  those  growing  out  of  the 
construction  of  the  Treaty  of  1818,  I will  write  you  more 
fully  hereafter.  I do  not  know  whether  our  citizens  engaged 
in  the  fisheries  seek  for  anything  more  than  what  they  would 
obtain  under  the  Treaty  of  1818  if  it  received  the  construc- 
tion for  which  we  contend.  If  they  do,  then  that  will  be  one 
additional  subject  of  negotiation ; the  right  of  navigating  the 
St.  Lawrence  and  the  Welland  Canal  will  of  course  be 
another ; but  the  reciprocal  trade  between  us  and  the  British 
Provinces  is  one  which  I greatly  prefer  should  be  settled 
by  legislation.  If  however  that  cannot  be  done,  it  may  be 
best  to  settle  it  by  a treaty  for  a limited  time.  But  as  I said 
before,  I will  write  you  more  fully  upon  this  subject  when 
I have  had  more  time  for  reflection. 

I have  seen  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  who  says  the 
Mississippi  Steam  Frigate,  Capt.  McCluney,  is  now  at  New 
York  and  could  be  sent  to  the  Banks  of  Newfoundland,  if 
desired.  She  is  however  as  you  are  aware  intended  as  the 
flag  ship  of  Capt.  Perry  and  of  course  will  soon  be  wanted 
for  that  Expedition.  I thought  however  that  I would  wait 
until  you  and  Mr.  Crampton  had  settled  upon  something 
definite,  from  which  proper  instructions  might  be  drawn, 
before  I ordered  the  vessel  to  proceed  to  that  destination. 


376 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


Regretting  that  this  unfortunate  business  compels  you  to 
leave  the  mountains  and  valleys  of  your  native  state,  but 
hoping  that  it  will  detain  you  but  a short  time,  I remain, 
Truly  & Sincerely  Yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

Secretary  of  State,  Boston,  Mass . 

Collections,  New  Hampshire  Historical  Society,  Concord,  N.  H. 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS  CONSIDERED. 

Washington  City,  July  24th,  1852. 

Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

Secretary  of  State, 

Boston,  Masstts. 

My  dear  Sir  : I wrote  you  hastily  on  the  20th  and  yes- 

terday received  yours  of  the  21st,  dated  at  Boston,  from 
which  I infer  that  you  had  not  received  mine  at  the  time  of 
writing.  I promised  in  that  communication  to  write  you 
further  on  the  subject  of  the  proposed  reciprocity  of  trade 
between  us  and  the  British  Provinces,  and  with  that  view 
I consulted  the  members'  of  the  Cabinet  at  our  weekly  meet- 
ing on  Wednesday,  all  of  whom  seemed  to  be  averse  to 
making  it  the  subject  of  treaty  stipulation.  I have  reflected 
much  on  the  subject  since,  and  with  a view  of  obtaining 
some  necessary  information  have  requested  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  to  report  to  me  the  amount  and  value  of 
the  articles  proposed  to  be  interchanged  free  of  duty,  which 
had  been  exported  or  imported  into  Canada  within  the  last 
three  years.  I have  not  yet  received  his  report;  but  this 
subject  involves  questions  of  such  delicate  and  vital  import- 
ance that  I think  if  the  negotiation  is  to  be  entered  upon  at 
all,  it  will  be  indispensible  that  it  be  done  here,  where  the 
whole  matter  can  be  weighed  in  all  its  bearings.  The  fol- 
lowing questions  well  deserve  consideration: 

First.  The  express  power  having  been  given  by  the  Con- 
stitution to  Congress,  to  regulate  commerce  with  foreign 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


377 


nations,  and  to  lay  and  collect  duties,  has  this  deprived  the 
treaty-making  power  of  authority  so  to  regulate  commerce, 
as  to  declare  that  no  duty  shall  be  collected  on  a particular 
article  imported  into  this  country  from  abroad? 

Secondly.  Assuming  that  the  treaty-making  power  may 
stipulate  to  admit  certain  articles  free  of  duty,  is  it  expedi- 
ent to  exercise  that  power  at  this  time  and  in  this  case? 

Thirdly.  What  effect  would  such  a treaty  stipulation 
have  upon  that  clause  in  our  commercial  treaties  which 
declares,  that  no  higher  duty  shall  be  imposed  upon  any 
goods  imported  from  the  country  with  whom  the  treaty  was 
made,  than  is  charged  upon  goods  of  the  same  kind  imported 
from  any  other  country?  For  instance,  would  such  a stipu- 
lation as  this  which  proposes  to  admit  hemp  and  wool  free 
of  duty  from  Canada  justify  Russia  or  England  in  claiming 
the  same  privileges  for  their  hemp  and  wool  ? 

Fourthly.  What  will  be  the  effect  upon  the  wool  grow- 
ing and  hemp  raising  portions  of  the  United  States,  if  we 
permit  the  hemp  and  wool  from  Canada  to  come  in  free? 

Fifthly  and  lastly.  What  is  to  be  the  effect  of  such  a 
measure  upon  the  general  principle  of  protection,  which  it 
has  been  our  policy  to  maintain,  so  far  as  necessary  to 
encourage  the  industry  of  the  country? 

It  seems  to  me  that  these  questions  require  such  con- 
sideration before  we  enter  upon  a negotiation  of  this  kind 
as  can  only  be  had  by  a mutual  and  free  interchange  of  sen- 
timent at  the  council  board,  and  I am  rather  averse  to  nego- 
tiating upon  this  subject  under  a state  of  things  that  looks 
a little  like  coercion  on  the  part  of  Great  Britain,  in  refer- 
ence to  our  fisheries.  I had  intended  to  have  written  you 
more  fully  but  have  been  too  busy.  These  questions,  how- 
ever, will  suggest  to  you  the  difficulties  that  surround  this 
case.  You  will  recollect  that  our  opinion  has  been  that  the 
question  of  reciprocal  trade  should  be  settled  by  legislation 
and  not  by  treaty. 

I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Collections,  New  Hampshire  Historical  Society,  Concord,  N.  H. 


378 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


SECRETARY  GRAHAM'S  RESIGNATION  ACCEPTED. 

Washington  City,  July  24th,  1852. 

Hon.  W.  A.  Graham, 

Secretary  of  the  Navy , 

Sir:  In  my  letter  to  you  of  the  30th  ult.  acknowledging 
the  receipt  of  yours  tendering  your  resignation  as  Secretary 
of  the  Navy,  I promised  to  accept  it,  as  soon  as  I could  find 
a successor  to  supply  your  place.  Having  now  accomplished 
that  object  I reluctantly  comply  with  that  promise,  and 
hereby  accept  your  resignation  to  take  effect  on  and  after 
the  25th  instant. 

I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Navy  Department. 


RECIPROCAL  FREE  TRADE  WITH  BRITISH  PROVINCES. 

Washington,  July  25,  1852. 

Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

Secretary  of  State,  Boston, 

My  dear  Sir:  I wrote  you  hastily  at  2 p.  m.  yesterday 
suggesting  some  of  the  difficulties  that  will  present  them- 
selves in  any  negotiation  to  settle  by  treaty  a reciprocal  free 
trade  with  the  British  Provinces,  in  certain  specified  articles, 
and  concluded  that  if  the  matter  was  attempted  at  all  it 
should  be  done  here,  after  a full  and  free  interchange  of 
sentiments  at  the  Council  Board. 

At  6 p.  m.  I received  your  telegram  from  Boston,  saying 
you  had  written  me,  and  enquiring  if  you  should  notify  the 
Colonial  authorities  that  we  would  not  submit  to  the  seizure 
of  our  fishing  vessels.  I immediately  convened  a Cabinet 
council  at  8 last  evening,  when  we  discussed  your  proposi- 
tion, and  I replied  in  substance  that  I thought  all  our  com- 
munications should  be  to  the  British  Government,  or  its 
Minister  and  not  to  the  Colonial  authorities;  but  that  it  was 
impossible  to  settle  these  matters  by  telegraph,  and  though 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


379 


I regretted  to  trouble  you,  I thought  the  whole  matter  ought 
at  once  to  be  transferred  to  the  seat  of  government.  I hope 
you  concur  with  me  in  this  view  of  the  case  and  that  you 
may  be  able  to  give  me  the  benefit  of  your  counsel  here,  on 
this  troublesome  matter,  without  delay.  But  if  it  be  incon- 
venient or  your  health  will  be  likely  to  suffer  by  the  journey, 
then  I beg  you  to  remain,  and  we  will  do  the  best  we  can 
without  you. 

I could  not,  in  a telegram,  inform  you  why  I thought  it 
not  best  to  make  your  proposed  communication  to  the  Colo- 
nial authorities.  But  they  were,  first,  Because  by  saying 
that  we  would  not  submit  to  a Seizure,  might  be  saying  that 
we  would  not  submit  to  abide  by  the  Stipulations  of  a treaty 
to  which  we  had  voluntarily  assented,  for  some  signers 
might  be  perfectly  legal  and  just,  others  doubtful,  and  then 
again  others  clearly  illegal  and  unjust.  Therefore  while  we 
would  submit  to  the  former,  and  contest  the  doubtful,  we 
would  resist  the  latter  not  by  remonstrance  merely  but  by 
force  if  necessary.  Secondly.  I could  not  explain  these 
shades  of  difference  by  telegraph,  and  a general  refusal  to 
submit  might  be  deemed  a threat,  that  would  unnecessarily 
stir  up  anger,  cause  popular  agitation  and  premature  com- 
mitments on  both  sides,  and  finally  place  us  in  the  wrong  by 
appearing  before  the  world  to  have  claimed  that  to  which 
we  were  not  entitled. 

Thirdly,  the  Colonies  had  no  power  to  settle  this  matter, 
and  it  seemed  to  me  therefore  somewhat  irregular  for  us, 
officially,  to  communicate  with  them  on  the  subject.  I know 
not  that  it  would  be  deemed  disrespectful  by  the  home  gov- 
ernment, yet  nations  are  apt  to  be  sensitive  on  any  point 
that  touches  their  national  honor ; and  perhaps  we  can  best 
appreciate  this  by  imagining  how  we  should  feel  if  G. 
Britain  in  a National  controversy  growing  out  of  treaty 
Stipulations  should  address  herself,  officially,  to  state  au- 
thorities, and  declare  to  them  that  [ ? what]  she  would  or 
would  not  do. 

But,  lastly,  I thought  this  matter  had  become  so  import- 
ant, and  delicate  that  nothing  more  should  be  done,  until  we 


380 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


had  settled  in  solemn  conclave,  precisely  what  our  rights 
were,  in  reference  to  the  matter  in  controversy.  It  is  all 
important  that  the  public  mind  should  not  be  misled  on  this 
subject.  We  must,  even  at  the  sacrifice  of  self  interest,  give 
to  Great  Britain  all  that  she  has  a right  to  claim  under  the 
treaty.  This  being  done,  our  own  rights  must  be  main- 
tained at  every  hazard  and  at  any  sacrifice. 

We  must  clearly  distinguish  between  rights  under  the 
Treaty  and  the  enjoyment  of  privileges,  which  have  been 
tacitly  conceded  by  G.  Britain  by  not  insisting  upon  a strict 
compliance  with  its  provisions.  We  can  not  be  deprived  of 
the  former  without  our  own  consent,  but  the  latter  we  must 
enjoy  at  the  mercy  of  the  rightful  owner.  If,  however,  she 
has  permitted  us  to  enjoy  them  so  long  that  the  uninter- 
rupted use  of  them,  has  justly  created  a confidence,  that  this 
permission  was  to  continue,  and  our  people  have  been  in- 
duced to  make  great  expenditures  in  anticipation  of  it,  then 
certainly  we  have  an  equitable  claim  upon  the  government 
of  G.  Britain,  that  it  should  give  reasonable  notice  of  her 
intention  to  resume  her  rights  under  the  treaty  that  our 
people  may  not  be  more  injured  by  her  gracious  indulgence 
which  she  has  extended  than  they  would  have  been  had  she 
exacted  with  the  utmost  rigor  all  she  was  ever  entitled  to 
claim  under  the  treaty.  But  for  this,  we  must  appeal  to  her 
magnanimity,  her  sense  of  justice, — and  not  to  arms — and  I 
can  not  believe  the  appeal  will  be  made  in  vain. 

Finally,  let  us  first  settle  our  respective  rights,  and  then 
enforce  our  own.  I fear  G.  B.  is  right  in  her  construction  of 
the  treaty,  but  at  all  events  it  is  sufficiently  doubtful  for  ar- 
bitrament. But  the  bell  rings  for  church  and  I must  close. 
Excuse  errors  for  I have  not  time  to  review  or  copy. 

Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Collections,  New  Hampshire  Historical  Society,  Concord,  N.  H. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


381 


TO  PROTECT  AMERICAN  FISHERMEN. 

Washington  City,  July  29th,  1852. 

Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

Secretary  of  State,  Boston,  Massts., 

My  dear  Sir:  I received  two  letters  from  you  yesterday, 
both  bearing  date  at  Marshfield  July  25th ; and  in  reference 
to  the  one  of  a private  character,  I think  you  offer  very 
satisfactory  reasons  for  the  course  which  you  have  concluded 
to  adopt,  although  my  first  impressions  were  otherwise.  I 
wrote  you  on  Saturday  and  on  Sunday,  but  of  course  you 
had  not  received  either  of  them.  I have  concluded  to  send 
Capt.  Perry  with  the  Mississippi  to  the  fishing  grounds  to 
give  protection  to  our  fishermen,  if  any  be  needed,  and  to 
inquire  into  the  whole  matter  and  report  here.  He  received 
his  instructions  and  left  yesterday.  I informed  Senator 
Mason  that  I should  send  in  the  Convention  between  the 
United  States  and  Great  Britain,  which  had  been  prema- 
turely published  by  Mr.  Harvey,  but  Mr.  Hunter  brought  to 
my  recollection  the  fact,  that  you  desired  to  accompany  my 
message  with  a report  of  the  reasons,  which  induced  the 
Government  to  enter  into  that  arrangement;  and  he  said 
that  you  had  been  furnished  with  the  requisite  papers  to  pre- 
pare such  a report  during  your  absence.  I am  anxious  to 
send  this  to  the  Senate  as  soon  as  possible,  lest  the  delay  may 
take  away  the  grace  of  the  act,  and  I shall  therefore  be 
happy  to  receive  your  report  at  your  earliest  convenience.  I 
think  I will  accompany  it  with  the  evidence  which  has  been 
collected  to  show  that  the  publication  did  not  take  place 
through  any  connivance  or  negligence  of  the  officers  in  your 
Department  or  of  the  Diplomatic  Corps.  I shall  wait  with 
some  solicitude  for  your  decision  on  the  other  matter  to 
which  you  refer  in  your  private  note. 

I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Collections,  New  Hampshire  Historical  Society,  Concord,  N.  H. 


382 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


RIGHT  OF  WAY  THROUGH  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

Washington  City,  July  30th,  1852. 
Hon.  John  J.  Crittenden, 

My  dear  Sir  : I have  the  honor  to  transmit  herewith,  an 
Act  of  Congress  to  grant  the  right  of  way  through  the  pub- 
lic lands  of  the  United  States  to  certain  roads,  and  I desire 
your  opinion,  whether  the  provisions  of  the  Act  will  extend 
to  lands  which  have  been  purchased  by  the  United  States 
for  lighthouses,  barracks,  hospitals,  arsenals,  armories, 
navy-yards,  and  other  like  purposes.  I will  call  your  atten- 
tion particularly  to  the  proviso  to  Section  third  of  the  Bill. 
As  the  Bill  is  sent  down  for  my  approval,  I shall  be  happy 
to  have  your  opinion  at  your  earliest  convenience. 

I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Attorney  General’s  Office,  Department  of  Justice. 

Crittenden’s  opinion  was  given  August  4,  1852,  a copy  being  with  the 
President’s  letter  in  the  files  of  the  Department  of  Justice.  He  held  that  the 
bill  granting  right  of  way  did  “not  extend  to  land  purchased  for  lighthouses, 
barracks,  dock-yards,  etc.” 


COMPLICATIONS  IN  NICARAGUA. 

Washington,  Aug.  23rd,  1852. 
The  Secretary  of  State, 

My  dear  Sir:  I herewith  return  the  despatch  of  Mr. 
Kerr  from  Nicaragua,  and  regret  to  see  that  all  our  efforts 
to  settle  the  territorial  question  have  been  frustrated  by  the 
insolence  and  folly  of  the  Canal  agents  in  that  country,  and 
the  perverseness  of  Marcoleta  and  his  associates  operating 
upon  the  prejudices,  hopes  and  fears  of  the  people  of  Nica- 
ragua. I do  not  myself  perceive  that  anything  more  can  be 
done  while  these  adverse  agencies  are  in  operation.  I do 
not  see  that  Mr.  Walsh  has  made  any  report,  but  he  informed 
me  that  before  he  arrived  in  Nicaragua  the  hostility  of  the 
Senate  to  the  proceedings  of  the  Administration  was  made 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


383 


known  there,  and  evidently  had  a very  unfavorable  influ- 
ence upon  our  efforts.  The  similarity  of  sentiment  which 
has  manifested  itself  in  our  Senate  here  and  in  the  Nica- 
raguan Legislature  shows  that  it  had  a common  origin,  to 
wit,  Marcoleta,  and  increases  the  suspicion  that  he  was  the 
person  who  disclosed  the  convention.  Is  the  proof  strong 
enough  to  justify  a request  for  his  recall?  Certainly  he  can 
be  of  no  further  use  here. 

I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


JUDICIAL  APPOINTMENT  FOR  OREGON. 

Washington,  Augt.  27th,  1852. 
The  Secretary  of  State, 

My  dear  Sir  : I herewith  return  the  papers  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  a judge  in  Oregon.  I perceive  that  your  son 
Fletcher  says,  that  it  is  doubtful  whether  Mr.  Train  will  be 
able  to  go.  I perceive  also  that  Mr.  Sanderson,  the  editor 
of  the  Philadelphia  News,  is  very  strongly  recommended  by 
the  whole  Pennsylvania  delegation  for  the  Chief  Justiceship. 
That  paper  has  done  good  service  to  the  Administration  and 
been  especially  devoted  to  you.  If  he  is  willing  to  take  the 
Assistant  Judgeship,  and  is  all  that  he  is  recommended  to 
be  by  the  delegation,  I would  submit  whether  he  had  better 
not  be  nominated.  But  before  it  is  done  I should  like  that 
you  should  have  a conversation  with  Mr.  Chandler,  or  some 
other  member  of  the  delegation  on  whom  you  can  rely,  to 
see  whether  he  is  in  all  respects  a suitable  man  for  the  place. 

Have  you  thought  of  any  candidate  for  the  consulship  at 
Acapulco?  If  not,  please  send  up  any  good  name,  such  for 
instance  as  George  W.  Slacum,  and  we  will  appoint  him  so 
as  to  be  able  to  fill  the  place  during  the  recess  if  he  should 
not  accept. 

I should  be  glad  to  send  in  the  rest  of  the  papers  in  regard 
to  the  Lobos  Islands  today,  if  possible.  I learn  from  the 


384 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


younger  Brooks  of  the  New  York  Express,  who  arrived 
here  last  evening,  that  some  40  vessels  have  sailed  for  those 
islands  under  the  expectation  of  being  protected  in  obtaining 
guano.  Their  disappointment  will  consequently  be  very 
great.  Is  it  possible  to  obtain  from  the  Peruvian  Minister 
some  recommendation  to  his  government  to  permit  those 
vessels,  which  have  sailed  under  this  misapprehension,  to 
take  their  cargoes  ? 

I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


ON  THE  SUBJECT  OF  THE  FISHERIES. 

Washington,  Sept.  8th,  1852. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Navy, 

My  dear  Sir:  I herewith  return  to  the  Department 
Commodore  Perry’s  despatches  on  the  subject  of  the  fish- 
eries, together  with  the  chart.  I would  suggest  the  propriety 
of  sending  copies  to  the  State  Department. 

I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Navy  Department. 

Endorsed:  “Done  Sept.  3d.  Ack.  & say:  That  in  conformity  to  the  sug- 

gestion contained  here  copies  of  the  papers  will  be  prepared  & sent  to  the  Dept, 
of  State.  Done  Sept.  10.” 

The  directions  are  in  pencil  but  the  “Done,”  etc.,  are  in  ink  and  in  the 
handwriting  of  a clerk,  while  the  pencil  directions  appear  to  be  in  the  hand 
of  the  Secretary  himself. 


A RUMOR  FROM  RUSSIAN  SOURCES. 

Washington,  Sept.  8,  1852. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Navy, 

My  dear  Sir  : Our  Minister  to  Russia,  under  date  of  the 
17th  ult.,  informs  me  that  information  had  been  received  at 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS . 


385 


St.  Petersburg  that  two  armed  vessels  bearing  the  American 
flag  had  recently  appeared  off  Queen  Charlotte’s  Island. 
Please  inform  me  if  any  of  our  vessels  were  probably  in 
that  region  at  that  time,  or  previous  thereto. 

I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Navy  Department. 


LOBOS  ISLANDS’  INTERESTS. 

Washington,  Sept,  io,  1852. 

Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

Secretary  of  State , 

My  dear  Sir  : I went  up  to  Berkeley  Springs  on  Satur- 
day, with  the  intention  of  bringing  my  family  home,  but 
finding  that  Mrs.  Fillmore  was  deriving  some  benefit  from 
the  water  I left  her  and  returned  on  Tuesday  evening. 

Nothing  of  importance  from  your  Department  has  been 
brought  to  my  notice  since  you  left,  nor  have  I received  any- 
thing from  you,  or  heard  from  you,  except  that  I saw  by  the 
papers  that  you  had  left  Boston  for  Marshfield.  I sincerely 
hope  that  your  health  may  be  improved. 

I have  received  some  letters  from  different  places,  stating 
that  the  writers  had  sent  out  vessels  to  the  Lobos  Islands 
for  Guano,  under  the  assurance  of  protection  from  the  gov- 
ernment, and  complaining  that  protection  was  withdrawn. 
These  letters,  however,  are  so  identicle  [sic]  in  language  that 
I cannot  doubt  that  they  have  a common  origin,  though 
they  purport  to  come  from  different  localities.  They  are 
doubtless  prompted  by  a desire,  either  to  embarrass  the 
Administration  for  political  effect,  or  to  lay  a foundation 
for  a future  claim  against  the  Government  for  pecuniary 
indemnity.  I hardly  think  they  are  entitled  to  any  considera- 
tion. I received  this  morning  the  inclosed  private  letter 
from  A.  G.  Benson  which  I have  thought  upon  the  whole 
it  was  my  duty  to  forward  to  you,  as  he  speaks  of  things  of 


386 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


which  I have  no  knowledge  and  on  which  I can  give  him  no 
information.  Please  to  return  the  letter  after  perusal. 

I am,  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Collections,  New  Hampshire  Historical  Society,  Concord,  N.  H. 


TRANSPORTATION  OF  STATUARY. 

[Washington]  September  22d,  1852. 

[To  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy] 

The  Navy  Department  will  take  charge  of  the  transporta- 
tion of  Mr.  Greenough’s  group  of  statuary,  now  at  Leghorn, 
awaiting  to  be  transferred  to  the  Capitol  of  the  United 
States,  and  will  give  the  necessary  directions  for  the  ship- 
ments of  the  groups,  to  be  delivered  at  the  Navy  Yard  at 
Washington. 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Navy  Department. 

Horatio  Greenough,  one  of  America’s  most  eminent  sculptors,  received  in 
1837,  a commission  from  the  United  States  Government  for  a group  of  statu- 
ary depicting  a combat  believe  a settler  and  an  Indian.  This  work,  called 
“The  Rescue,”  occupied  him,  at  his  studio  at  Rome,  at  intervals  until  1851, 
and  is  probably  the  group  referred  to  in  Mr.  Fillmore’s  letter.  Greenough’s 
statue  of  Washington  was  an  earlier  work. 


RELATING  TO  THE  NAVAL  SERVICE. 

Washington,  Sept.  24th,  1852. 

Hon.  J.  P.  Kennedy, 

Secretary  of  the  Navy. 

Sir  : I have  your  communication  of  yesterday  inclosing 

a list  of  several  officers  of  the  Navy,  who  had  been  promoted 
by  appointment  during  the  recess  before  the  last  session  of 
Congress,  and  who  were  nominated  to  the  Senate  during 
its  last  session,  but  upon  which  nominations  the  Senate  failed 
to  act,  and  showing  that  the  Naval  service  is  greatly  embar- 
rassed, in  consequence  of  the  peculiar  condition  in  which 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


387 


these  officers  were  left,  many  of  whom  are  now  at  sea,  and 
in  the  performance  of  important  duties.  It  appears  to  me, 
on  looking  at  this  subject,  that  the  promotion  of  a naval  or 
military  officer  from  one  grade  to  another  and  the  accept- 
ance by  him  of  the  higher  grade  necessarily  vacates  his 
office  in  the  lower,  as  the  two  positions,  implying  rank  and 
command,  on  the  one  side,  and  subordination  on  the  other, 
are  incompatible  with  each  other.  As  the  commissions  which 
promoted  these  officers  to  the  higher  rank  expired  at  the 
close  of  the  last  session  of  Congress,  the  inevitable  conse- 
quence would  seem  to  be,  that  these  officers  are  out  of  com- 
mission. They  lost  their  first  rank  on  promotion  to  and 
acceptance  of  the  higher,  and  the  commission  to  the  higher 
having  expired,  they  are  no  longer  officers  of  the  Navy. 

The  question  then  presents  itself,  whether  I have  the 
power  to  commission  them  again,  until  the  termination  of 
the  next  session  of  the  Senate.  The  Constitution  declares, 
that,  “the  President  shall  have  power  to  fill  up  all  vacancies, 
that  may  happen  during  the  recess  of  the  Senate,  by  grant- 
ing commissions,  which  shall  expire  at  the  end  of  their  next 
session.  [”]  In  Gen1.  Swartwout’s  case,  in  principle  pre- 
cisely like  this,  Atty.  Gen1.  Wirt  gave  it  as  his  opinion  to 
President  Munroe  [sic],  on  the  22nd  of  October,  1823,  that 
the  President  had  the  power  to  fill  such  a vacancy,  by  grant- 
ing a new  Commission  which  would  expire  at  the  end  of 
the  next  session  of  the  Senate.  See  1st  Vol.  Opinions  of 
the  Attornies  General  p.  631. 

Attorney  General  Roger  B.  Taney,  now  Chief  Justice  of 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  on  the  19th  of  July 
gave  a like  opinion  to  President  Jackson,  in  the  case  of  Mr. 
Gwinn,  without  appearing  to  have  been  aware  of  the  opinion 
of  Attorney  General  Wirt.  In  that  opinion,  however,  he 
states  that  President  Adams  had  filled  a similar  vacancy  in 
the  Navy  Agency  at  Boston  by  the  appointment  of  Amos 
Binney.  2nd  Vol.  Opinions  of  the  Attornies  General  p.  525. 

Attorney  General  Legare  gave  a similar  opinion,  Octo- 
ber 22,  1841,  without  appearing  to  have  been  aware  of  the 
previous  decisions  of  his  predecessors;  and  in  1846,  Presi- 


388 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


dent  Polk  filled  a similar  vacancy  in  the  Post  Office  at  Buf- 
falo, where  he  had  nominated  to  the  place  during  the  ses- 
sion of  the  Senate,  and  the  Senate  had  failed  to  act  upon 
his  nomination. 

All  this  concurring  testimony  in  favor  of  the  authority, 
without  any  judicial  or  executive  opinion  against  it,  would 
seem  to  leave  no  reasonable  doubt  on  this  head.  Yet  the 
intention  of  the  framers  of  the  Constitution  evidently  was, 
that  these  appointments  should  be  submitted  to  the  consid- 
eration of  the  Senate  at  the  first  session  after  they  were 
made.  This  it  is  true  was  done  in  all  these  cases,  and  the 
Senate  had  an  opportunity  to  approve  or  disapprove  those 
appointments,  but  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  that  fact  can 
effect  [sic]  the  authority  of  the  President  of  appointing  to 
fill  the  vacancy  without  its  approval,  and  we  must  there- 
fore conclude  that  the  President  might  exercise  this  power, 
without  having  previously  nominated  the  officer  to  the  Sen- 
ate; the  consequence  of  which  would  be  that  by  continued 
temporary  commissions  and  an  omission  on  the  part  of  the 
President  to  nominate  to  the  Senate  he  might  continue  to 
fill  these  offices  without  its  concurrence.  This  would  evi- 
dently be  a violation  of  the  spirit  of  the  Constitution.  But 
it  would  certainly  be  in  the  power  of  Congress  to  make 
such  an  omission  a high  crime  or  misdemeanor,  and  then  to 
impeach  the  President  for  his  neglect  of  duty  in  omitting  to 
nominate  the  officers  to  the  Senate. 

Seeing  the  facility  with  which  this  salutary  provision 
may  be  evaded,  not  to  say  the  strong  temptation  which  may 
arise  to  evade  it,  I shall  exercise  this  power  with  great 
reluctance.  But  considering  the  serious  consequences  that 
may  arise  to  innocent  persons,  who  had  reason  to  suppose 
they  were  exercising  a legitimate  authority  in  the  service  of 
their  country,  and  the  injury  which  might  result  to  the 
public  service  by  suffering  this  state  of  things  longer  to  con- 
tinue, I have  concluded  that  I have  the  authority,  and  that 
it  is  my  duty  to  exercise  it  by  giving  to  those  several  officers 
of  the  Navy  who  were  appointed  during  the  last  recess  and 
nominated  to  the  Senate  during  its  last  session  temporary 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


389 


commissions,  to  expire  at  the  end  of  its  next  session;  and 
you  will  please  to  make  them  out  and  send  them  up  for  my 
signature. 

I herewith  return  you  letter  No.  i and  your  List  of 
Officers,  No.  2 and  the  list  from  the  Secretary  of  the  Senate 
No.  3 from  which  you  will  be  able  to  make  out  the  com- 
missions. 

I am  your  obt.  servt., 

Millard  Fillmore. 

Navy  Department. 

List  No.  2,  forty-one  nominations,  enclosed  in  letter.  Of  these  eight  are 
other  than  positions  in  the  Navy.  An  inserted  note  states  that  commissions 
were  issued  September  25,  1852. 


TO  THE  SECRETARY  OF  WAR. 

Washington,  Sept.  27,  1852. 

Hon.  Daniel  Webster, 

Secy,  of  State,  Boston,  Mass. 

My  dear  Sir  : Your  favor  of  the  22nd  came  to  hand  on 

Saturday  the  25th,  and  I am  pained  to  hear  that  you  are  suf- 
fering so  much.  I would  not  presume  at  this  distance  to 
advise,  but  I could  not  help  fearing,  on  perusing  your  letter, 
that  you  were  too  abstemious.  Is  there  not  danger  that  a 
change  so  great  and  so  sudden  may  prove  more  injurious 
than  a little  indulgence  in  your  regimen?  I can  well  con- 
ceive, that  in  your  situation,  you  do  not  desire  to  be  called 
upon  even  to  “think,”  and  I shall  therefore  not  trouble  you 
with  any  reference  to  business,  farther  than  to  say  that  all 
things  appear  to  be  going  on  very  well  in  your  Department. 

The  new  Minister  from  Peru  has  been  received,  but  has 
as  yet  made  no  communication  beyond  his  letter  of  credence, 
by  which  I learn  that  he  is  fully  authorized  to  treat  on  all 
subjects  of  difference.  If  we  escape  a collision,  I think  we 
will  have  no  difficulty  in  obtaining  permission  for  our  ships 
to  load  on  usual  terms. 

I regret  almost  as  much  as  you  do,  that  I am  not  able  to 
confer  a diplomatic  appointment  on  our  friend  Fay.  I 


390 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


hardly  anticipated  that  the  Dr.  would  accept  it,  but  I find 
there  are  few  Whigs  in  these  times  to  refuse  such  an  offer. 
I believe,  however,  that  this  is  the  last  personal  obligation 
I feel  bound  to  discharge,  and  should  anything  hereafter 
occur  I shall  remember  Mr.  Fay. 

I sincerely  hope  that  the  next  intelligence  we  receive  will 
show  you  convalescent.  The  weather  at  this  place  is  now 
very  fine ; but  whether  it  will  be  better  for  your  health  than 
your  present  locality  I am  unable  to  say. 

With  sincere  respect  and  esteem,  I remain 
Truly  Yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Webster  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


SOLICITOUS  AS  TO  MR.  WEBSTER'S  HEALTH. 

Washington,  October  i,  1852. 

[To  Daniel  Webster] 

My  dear  Sir  : I have  this  moment  received  yours  of  the 
28th  ultimo,  and  have  perused  it  with  a good  deal  of  solici- 
tude. I am  not  competent  to  judge  whether  such  a violent 
attack  of  constipation  as  you  have  been  suffering  from  can 
be  regarded  as  dangerous,  but  I hope  not.  I shall  not  cease 
to  feel  the  utmost  solicitude  until  I know  that  you  are  re- 
stored to  health.  I sincerely  hope  that  you  may  have  the 
benefit  of  the  advice  of  your  old  physician  from  Boston,  and 
after  he  has  paid  you  a friendly  visit,  and  one  which  I ear- 
nestly desire  may  be  the  means  of  restoring  you  to  health, 
may  I anticipate  the  satisfaction  of  hearing  from  you  again. 
It  is  a source  of  great  gratification  to  know  that,  at  the  time 
you  wrote,  you  were  free  from  pain. 

All  things  are  going  on  as  well  as  usual,  but  I have  not 
been  able  as  yet  to  obtain  any  proposition  in  reference  to  the 
Lobos  affair  from  Mr.  Osma,  the  new  minister.  He  left 
for  New  York  immediately  after  his  reception,  and  I have 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


391 


requested  the  acting  Secretary  to  ask  him  to  return,  and  he 
may  be  here  today. 

Hoping  soon  to  hear  of  your  restoration  to  health, 

I remain,  truly  and  sincerely,  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

“Private  Correspondence  of  Daniel  Webster,”  edited  by  Fletcher  Webster, 
PP-  555.  556. 


CUBAN  AND  LOBOS  ISLANDS  AFFAIRS. 

Washington,  October  13,  1852. 

[To  Daniel  Webster] 

My  dear  Sir:  Your  favor  of  the  8th  instant  came  duly 
to  hand,  from  which  I learn  the  favorable  report  of  your 
physicians,  which  has  relieved  me  of  much  anxiety.  I hope 
now  that  you  may  soon  be  with  us. 

On  inquiry  today,  I was  informed  that  Mr.  Bradley  had 
not  yet  returned.  All  matters  are  passing  on  here  much  as 
usual. 

The  filibusters,  you  perceive,  are  endeavoring  to  get  up  a 
new  controversy  with  Cuba,  but  I hardly  think  they  will 
succeed.  The  Lobos  affair  is  yet  unsettled,  but  I trust  we 
are  making  some  progress.  I do  not,  however,  feel  justified 
in  troubling  you  on  matters  of  business,  and  therefore  con- 
tent myself  with  expressing  the  hope  that  you  may  soon  be 
restored  to  health,  and  that  we  shall,  ere  long,  have  the 
pleasure  of  meeting  you  at  the  council  board. 

Please  to  make  my  kindest  regards  to  Mrs.  Webster  and 
believe  me, 

Sincerely  your  friend, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

“Private  Correspondence  of  Daniel  Webster,”  edited  by  Fletcher  Webster, 
P-  558- 


392 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


ABSENCES  OF  TERRITORIAL  OFFICERS. 

Washington,  Oct.  13,  1852. 

Hon.  E[lisha]  Whittlesey, 

My  dear  Sir:  I have  your  letter  of  the  12th  requesting 
my  decision  as  to  my  power  over  the  absences  of  territorial 
officers  prior  to  the  Act  of  August  31st,  1852.  My  attention 
had  not  before  been  called  to  the  7th  section  of  the  act  to 
which  you  refer,  but  I confess  that  it  appears  to  me  that 
the  Act  of  August  31st,  1852,  takes  away  the  power  on  this 
subject  granted  by  the  Act  of  June  15th,  1852.  I have  no 
doubt  of  the  reasonableness  of  the  absence  of  Judge  Watts 
from  his  territory.  He  has  been  a most  faithful  officer, 
asked  and  received  permission  to  leave  the  territory,  and  was 
detained  in  consequence  of  the  illness  of  his  wife,  and  re- 
turned within  the  time  required  by  me.  This  permission 
was,  of  course,  granted  while  the  Act  of  June  15th  was  in 
force,  and  as  he  has  acted  in  good  faith,  I should  regret  that 
he  should  be  deprived  of  his  salary.  But  the  law  must  be 
executed  whatever  it  is.  I do  not  propose  to  express  any 
opinion  on  that  point. 

I am  truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


From  copy  of  original  in  files  of  Attorney  General’s  office,  Department 
of  Justice.  A copy  of  Whittlesey’s  letter  of  October  12th  is  in  the  same  files. 


TO  INCREASE  THE  MARINE  CORPS. 

Executive  Chamber,  October  29th,  1852. 

There  being  an  absolute  necessity  for  an  increase  of  the 
rank  and  file  of  the  Marine  Corps,  to  insure  efficiency  in  the 
vessels  of  the  Navy  and  to  guard  the  public  property  at 
Navy  Yards — as  reported  by  the  Commandant  of  the 
Corps  and  submitted  to  me  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy; 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


393 


and  Congress  having  by  its  “Act  making  appropriations  for 
the  Naval  Service  for  the  year  ending  the  thirtieth  of  June 
one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  fifty,”  approved  March  3d, 
1849,  “provided,  That  the  President  of  the  United  States 
may  substitute  Marines  for  Landsmen  in  the  Navy,  as  far  as 
he  may  deem  it  expedient  to  promote  the  efficiency  of  the 
service”  ; 

Now,  therefore,  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  is  hereby 
directed  to  increase  said  Corps  of  Marines  by  substituting 
two  hundred  Marines,  including  the  requisite  number  of 
non-commissioned  officers,  in  lieu  of  the  same  number  of 
landsmen  in  the  Navy,  and  the  said  two  hundred  non-com- 
missioned officers  and  privates  are  to  be  enlisted  under  the 
provisions  of  law  for  the  better  organization  of  the  United 
States  “Marine  Corps.” 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Signed  document,  Navy  Department. 


TO  THE  MIKADO  OF  JAPAN. 

[Washington,  Nov.  13,  1852.] 

Great  and  good  Friend:  I send  you  this  public  letter 

by  Commodore  Matthew  C.  Perry,  an  officer  of  the  highest 
rank  in  the  navy  of  the  United  States,  and  commander  of 
the  squadron  now  visiting  your  imperial  majesty’s  do- 
minions. 

I have  directed  Commodore  Perry  to  assure  your  imperial 
majesty  that  I entertain  the  kindest  feelings  toward  jour 
majesty’s  person  and  government,  and  that  I have  no  other 
object  in  sending  him  to  Japan  but  to  propose  to  your 
imperial  majesty  that  the  United  States  and  Japan  should 
live  in  friendship  and  have  commercial  intercourse  with 
each  other. 

The  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States  forbid  all 
interference  with  the  religious  or  political  concerns  of  other 


394 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


nations.  I have  particularly  charged  Commodore  Perry 
to  abstain  from  every  act  which  could  possibly  disturb  the 
tranquility  of  your  imperial  majesty’s  dominions. 

The  United  States  of  America  reach  from  ocean  to  ocean, 
and  our  Territory  of  Oregon  and  State  of  California  lie 
directly  opposite  to  the  dominions  of  your  imperial  majesty. 
Our  steamships  can  go  from  California  to  Japan  in  eighteen 
days. 

Our  great  State  of  California  produces  about  sixty  mil- 
lions of  dollars  in  gold  every  year,  besides  silver,  quick- 
silver, precious  stones,  and  many  other  valuable  articles. 
Japan  is  also  a rich  and  fertile  country,  and  produces  many 
very  valuable  articles.  Your  imperial  majesty’s  subjects  are 
skilled  in  many  of  the  arts.  I am  desirous  tftat  our  two 
countries  should  trade  with  each  other,  for  the  benefit  both 
of  Japan  and  the  United  States. 

We  know  that  the  ancient  laws  of  your  imperial  majesty’s 
government  do  not  allow  of  foreign  trade,  except  with  the 
Chinese  and  the  Dutch;  but  as  the  state  of  the  world  changes 
and  new  governments  are  formed,  it  seems  to  be  wise,  from 
time  to  time,  to  make  new  laws.  There  was  a time  when 
the  ancient  laws  of  your  imperial  majesty’s  government  were 
first  made. 

About  the  same  time  America,  which  is  sometimes  called 
the  New  World,  was  first  discovered  and  settled  by  the 
Europeans.  For  a long  time  there  were  but  a few  people, 
and  they  were  poor.  They  have  now  become  quite  numer- 
ous ; their  commerce  is  very  extensive ; and  they  think  that 
if  your  imperial  majesty  were  so  far  to  change  the  ancient 
laws  as  to  allow  a free  trade  between  the  two  countries  it 
would  be  extremely  beneficial  to  both. 

If  your  imperial  majesty  is  not  satisfied  that  it  would  be 
safe  altogether  to  abrogate  the  ancient  laws  which  forbid 
foreign  trade,  they  might  be  suspended  for  five  or  ten  years, 
so  as  to  try  the  experiment.  If  it  does  not  prove  as  bene- 
ficial as  was  hoped,  the  ancient  laws  can  be  restored.  The 
United  States  often  limit  their  treaties  with  foreign  States 
to  a few  years,  and  then  renew  them  or  not,  as  they  please. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS . 


395 


I have  directed  Commodore  Perry  to  mention  another 
thing  to  your  imperial  majesty.  Many  of  our  ships  pass 
every  year  from  California  to  China ; and  great  numbers  of 
our  people  pursue  the  whale  fishery  near  the  shores  of  Japan. 
It  sometimes  happens,  in  stormy  weather,  that  one  of  our 
ships  is  wrecked  on  your  imperial  majesty’s  shores.  In  all 
such  cases  we  ask,  and  expect,  that  our  unfortunate  people 
should  be  treated  with  kindness,  and  that  their  property 
should  be  protected,  till  we  can  send  a vessel  and  bring  them 
away.  We  are  very  much  in  earnest  in  this. 

Commodore  Perry  is  also  directed  by  me  to  represent  to 
your  imperial  majesty  that  we  understand  there  is  a great 
abundance  of  coal  and  provisions  in  the  Empire  of  Japan. 
Our  steamships,  in  crossing  the  great  ocean,  burn  a great 
deal  of  coal,  and  it  is  not  convenient  to  bring  it  all  the  way 
from  America.  We  wish  that  our  steamships  and  other  ves- 
sels should  be  allowed  to  stop  in  Japan  and  supply  them- 
selves with  coal,  provisions  and  water.  They  will  pay  for 
them  in  money,  or  anything  else  your  imperial  majesty’s 
subjects  may  prefer;  and  we  request  your  imperial  majesty 
to  appoint  a convenient  port,  in  the  southern  part  of  the 
Empire,  where  our  vessels  may  stop  for  this  purpose.  We 
are  very  desirous  of  this. 

These  are  the  only  objects  for  which  I have  sent  Com- 
modore Perry,  with  a powerful  squadron,  to  pay  a visit  to 
your  imperial  majesty’s  renowned  city  of  Yedo : Friendship, 
commerce,  a supply  of  coal  and  provisions,  and  protection 
for  our  shipwrecked  people. 

We  have  directed  Commodore  Perry  to  beg  your  imperial 
majesty’s  acceptance  of  a few  presents.  They  are  of  no 
great  value  in  themselves ; but  some  of  them  may  serve  as 
specimens  of  the  articles  manufactured  in  the  United  States, 
and  they  are  intended  as  tokens  of  our  sincere  and  respect- 
ful friendship. 

May  the  Almighty  have  your  imperial  majesty  in  His 
great  and  holy  keeping. 

In  witness  whereof,  I have  caused  the  great  seal  of  the 
United  States  to  be  hereunto  affixed,  and  have  subscribed 


396 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


the  same  with  my  name,  at  the  city  of  Washington,  in 
America,  the  seat  of  my  government,  on  the  thirteenth  day 
of  the  month  of  November,  in  the  year  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  fifty-two. 

Your  good  friend, 

Millard  Fillmore. 


By  the  President  : 

[seal]  Edward  Everett, 

Secretary  of  State. 


“Narrative  of  the  Expedition  ...  to  the  China  Seas  and  Japan 
. . . under  the  command  of  Commodore  M.  C.  Perry,”  etc.,  Washington, 

1856;  Vol.  I,  pp.  256,  257. 

The  volume  from  which  this  letter  and  the  following  were  transcribed  for 
the  present  publication,  in  the  library  of  the  Buffalo  Historical  Society,  con- 
tains the  following  autograph  inscriptions:  “For  President  Fillmore,  with  the 

best  respects  of  M.  C.  Perry.”  “Millard  Fillmore,  September  6,  1856.”  “Pre- 
sented to  the  Buffalo  Historical  Society  by  Millard  Fillmore,  February  10, 
1867.” 


LETTER  OF  CREDENCE  TO  COMMODORE  PERRY. 

[November  13,  1852.] 

Millard  Fillmore,  President  of  the  United  States  of 
America, 

To  His  Imperial  Majesty  the  Emperor  of  Japan: 
Reposing  special  trust  and  confidence  in  the  integrity,  pru- 
dence and  ability  of  Matthew  C.  Perry,  a captain  in  the 
Navy  of  the  United  States,  I have  invested  him  with  full 
power,  for  and  in  the  name  of  the  said  United  States,  to 
meet  and  confer  with  any  person  or  persons  furnished  with 
like  powers  on  the  part  of  your  Imperial  Majesty,  and  with 
him  or  them  to  negotiate,  conclude  and  sign  a convention  or 
conventions,  treaty  or  treaties,  of  and  concerning  the  friend- 
ship, commerce,  and  navigation  of  the  two  countries;  and 
all  matters  and  subjects  connected  therewith  which  may  be 
interesting  to  the  two  nations,  submitting  the  same  to  the 
President  of  the  United  States  for  his  final  ratification,  by 
and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


397 


In  testimony  whereof,  I have  caused  the  seal  of  the 
United  States  to  be  hereunto  affixed. 

Given  under  my  hand,  at  the  city  of  Washington,  the 
thirteenth  day  of  November,  in  the  year  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  fifty-two,  and  of  the  independence  of  the 
United  States  of  America  the  seventy-seventh. 

Millard  Fillmore. 

By  the  President: 

[seal]  Edward  Everett, 

Secretary  of  State. 

"Narrative  of  the  expedition  . . . under  the  command  of  Commodore 

M.  C.  Perry,”  Vol.  I,  p.  259. 


TO  THE  ATTORNEY  GENERAL. 

[1852,  ?Nov.] 

Dear  Sir  : I have  written  the  enclosed  declension  adapt- 

ing it  to  the  message  and  as  you  requested  send  it  again  for 
revision.  I am  not  satisfied  with  it  myself  and  should  be 
happy  if  you  would  write  one  entirely  new,  instead  of  revis- 
ing this. 

Truly  yours, 

Millard  Fillmore. 

J.  J.  Crittenden,  Atty.  General. 

Crittenden  collection,  Library  of  Congress. 


AN  APPOINTMENT  SOUGHT. 

[?I852.] 

The  undersigned  and  representatives  from  the  State  of 
New  York  recommend  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  Wil- 
liam Seaver  of  said  State,  for  the  office  of  Midshipman  in 
the  United  States  Navy,  and  solicit  his  appointment  when- 
ever a vacancy  may  occur. 

Millard  Fillmore. 


Collection  of  Mr.  George  C.  Thomas,  Philadelphia. 


398 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


CALENDAR  OF  LETTERS  FROM  PRESIDENT 
FILLMORE  TO  THE  SECRETARY 
OF  THE  TREASURY 

1852. 

Apr.  8.  To  Thomas  Corwin,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury:  Relates 

to  giving  commission  to  the  [new]  collector  at  New 
Orleans.  Senator  [Salmon  W.]  Downs  [of  La.]  requests 
that  commission  be  not  issued  until  after  the  reading  of 
the  President’s  Message  in  Congress. 

May  8.  To  Thomas  Corwin:  Requests  information  regarding  de- 
faulters in  service  of  Treasury  Department,  asks  list  of 
officials  behindhand  in  accounts  for  past  year  and  not 
of  past  quarter  alone,  and  recommendation  as  to  dis- 
missal of,  or  a further  indulgence  to  each  person  on  list. 

13.  To  Thomas  Corwin:  Requests  that  reports  on  the  dis- 

bursement of  public  money  be  made  quarterly,  with 
names  of  persons  delinquent  in  reporting  to  the  Treas- 
ury Department. 

June  4.  To  Thomas  Corwin:  Requests  information  regarding  the 
appointment  of  a Collector  of  Customs  at  New  Orleans 
and  the  conditions  existing  at  that  place;  a report  rela- 
tive to  the  conduct  of  Collector  [ ] King  at  San 

Francisco,  and  information  as  to  defalcation  of  the  Col- 
lector at  Astoria. 

14.  To  Thomas  Corwin : Encloses  letter  from  “A  Clay  Whig” 

of  San  Francisco  complaining  against  [ ] Jones, 

disbursing  agent  at  that  place,  and  asks  report  on  same. 

25.  To  Thomas  Corwin:  Encloses  letter  from  David  Taylor, 
presenting  claims  against  the  United  States  Treasury, 
but  the  President  refuses  to  interfere  in  the  matter. 

July  6.  To  Thomas  Corwin:  Relative  to  appointments.  The 

Governor  of  California  is  in  Washington  and  in  con- 
sultation with  him  [Fillmore]  as  to  these  matters.  The 
President  desires  list  of  names  of  all  candidates  for 
offices  in  the  Customs  service  or  in  the  Mint.  [Presum- 
ably California  candidates,  but  not  definitely  stated  in 
letter.] 

22.  To  Thomas  Corwin : Endorsement  on  letter  of  Secretary 

as  to  appeal  of  Capt.  [ ] Frazer  for  restoration  to 

Marine  Revenue  service.  Approves  the  appeal  and  rec- 
ommends favorable  action  thereon. 


OFFICIAL  LETTERS. 


399 


Sept. 


Dec. 


2.  To  Thomas  Corwin:  Relates  to  the  removal  from  office 
of  the  2d  Auditor,  of  [official]  papers  which  had  been 
under  the  custody  of  John  S.  Neely;  asks  for  further 
information. 

22.  To  Thomas  Corwin:  Relates  to  claims  in  case  of  Charles 
G.  Sherman  under  Article  g of  the  Florida  treaty;  the 
President  does  not  feel  authorized  to  set  a precedent  in 
the  case  now  presented. 

2.  To  Thomas  Corwin:  Is  awaiting  the  appointment  of  reve- 
nue officers  [by  the  Secretary]  ; has  something  to  say 
regarding  the  report  of  [?  Julius]  Rockwell  as  to 
patronage. 


ADDRESSES 

POLITICAL  AND  OFFICIAL 


1840  TO  1856 


Erected  on  the  18th  of  March,  by  the  Whigs  of  Buffalo;  and  Dedicated  to  the  Cause  of  Harrison  and  Tyler  on  the  20th  of  March,  1840. 


EARLY  POLITICAL  SPEECHES 


No  adequate  reports  are  known  to  exist  of  several  of  Mr. 
Filnnore’s  earlier  addresses.  An  occasion  when  his  readi- 
ness and  ability  attracted  wide  notice,  was  a meeting  in  the 
log  cabin  which  the  admirers  of  “Tippecanoe  and  Tyler  too'’ 
had  erected  in  Buffalo,1  in  the  campaign  of  1840.  Here,  on 
the  evening  of  October  23d,  the  Hon.  William  Patterson  of 
Warsaw  was  expected  to  speak  on  the  issues  of  the  hour; 
but  he  being  detained  by  bad  roads  and  a slow  stage,  Mr. 
Fillmore  was  called  upon  to  fill  the  gap.  Of  his  speech  the 
Commercial  Advertiser  of  the  following  day  contained  only 
the  following  inadequate  summary: 

Mr.  Fillmore  related  many  facts  and  circumstances  of 
which  he  had  been  an  eye-witness  during  several  of  the  last 
sessions  of  Congress,  of  Executive  dictation  and  usurpation, 
and  servile  obedience  on  the  part  of  a truckling  majority  of 
the  Representatives  of  the  people,  which  excited  the  deep 
and  just  indignation  of  every  freeman  present.  Matters  have 
got  to  such  a pass  at  the  Federal  Capitol,  that  the  friends 
of  the  Administration  in  Congress  dare  not  permit  an  open 
and  searching  investigation  into  the  reeking  corruptions  of 
the  reigning  Dynasty.  Mr.  Fillmore  said  our  National  laws 
must  be  very  severe  on  our  Federal  rulers,  as  it  seemed  to 
compel  them,  in  their  present  hopeless  Sub-Treasury  bank- 
ruptcy, to  sell  at  auction  and  at  an  immense  sacrifice  their 
very  mechanic  tools  and  implements  for  constructing  public 
works ; while  the  humane  laws  of  the  States,  allowed  insol- 

1.  This  log  cabin  stood  at  the  northeast  corner  of  Main  and  Eagle  streets. 
An  old  lithograph  of  it,  with  the  original  inscription,  is  reproduced  herewith. 


403 


404 


EARLY  POLITICAL  SPEECHES. 


vent  mechanics  to  retain  their  tools,  exempt  from  the  ham- 
mer of  the  auctioneer,  to  commence  business  with  again. 
“But,”  said1  the  speaker,  “Mr.  Van  Buren  doubtless  does 
not  expect  to  have  any  use  for  pile-drivers  and  scows  after 
this  season ; hence  he  is  selling  these  articles  at  one-tenth 
their  cost  to  replenish  an  exhausted  treasury.” 

A day  or  two  later  Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  at  Albion ; of  that 
speech  we  find  only  the  following  report.  It  must  have  been 
a remarkable  effort,  if  the  summary  does  it  justice  (Buffalo 
Commercial  Advertiser , October  28th)  : 

Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  for  about  two  hours  and  a half.  He 
analyzed  the  Sub-Treasury — showed  its  origin,  character, 
and  consequences  upon  the  people,  in  the  most  clear,  forci- 
ble and  convincing  manner.  Never  were  the  odious  features 
of  this  “Child  of  Despotism,”  more  correctly  mirrored  forth, 
and  never  were  they  made  to  look  more  detestable  to  free- 
men. It  was  the  happiest  and  most  successful  effort,  to 
strip  this  bantling  of  Van  Buren  of  its  false  trappings,  and 
to  show  it  up  as  the  illegitimate  offspring  of  an  illicit  inter- 
course with  twenty-two  prostitute  despotisms  of  the  old 
world,  that  we  ever  heard  made.  And  in  the  name  and 
behalf  of  the  Whigs  of  Orleans  County,  we  return  Mr. 
Fillmore  their  hearty  thanks  for  his  highly  eloquent,  argu- 
mentative and  interesting  speech,  on  the  occasion. 

NEW  YORK  WHIG  RATIFICATION  MEETING,  1844. 

Mr.  Fillmore  was  an  unsuccessful  candidate  for  Vice- 
President  in  the  Whig  convention  at  Baltimore  in  May, 
1844.  He  was  not  present  at  the  convention,  but  attended 
a great  ratification  meeting  in  New  York  City,  May  18th, 
where  he  was  enthusiastically  greeted,  and  spoke  as  follows : 

Fellow-Citizens:  This  is  an  unexpected  gratification 
that  I have  in  meeting  so  many  of  my  Whig  friends  here, 
and  of  having  such  a welcome  from  them.  When  I look 
over  this  sea  of  heads  I cannot  help  being  reminded  of  1840, 


EARLY  POLITICAL  SPEECHES. 


405 


and  of  the  scenes  of  1840;  and,  although  I have  not  been  to 
Baltimore,  I feel  that  that  spirit  is  revived  which  carried 
us  so  successfully  and  so  gloriously  through  the  scenes  of 
that  ever-memorable  campaign.  It  was  not  my  good  fortune 
to  participate  in  the  magnificent  display  of  Whigs,  Whig 
feelings  and  Whig  principles,  which  many  of  you  have  wit- 
nessed elsewhere,  but  I have  heard  the  result  of  their  delib- 
erations. 

I did  not  come  here  to  make  a speech ; I did  not  till  lately 
expect  to  be  called  upon ; but  as  I was  about  saying,  when 
I heard  the  nominations  made  at  Baltimore,  I knew  they 
must  be  satisfactory  to  the  people — not  to  Whigs  alone,  not 
to  the  Whig  party  alone,  but  to  a large  majority  of  the 
people,  and  particularly  to  those  classes  whom  an  ordinary 
election  does  not  call  out  to  vote.  The  candidate  whom  you 
have  selected  that  “Justice  shall  he  done ” — he  of  all  others 
is  the  man  to  excite,  to  strengthen,  and  to  unite  the  Whigs 
of  the  Union.  And  as  for  the  gentleman  whom  you  have 
selected  for  the  Vice-Presidency,  I think  him  the  very  best 
man  you  could  have  got.  I stand  not  here  to  represent  the 
West,  that  great  section  of  the  State  whence  I came,  and 
whence  come  an  army  of  Whigs  irresistible  in  array.  I 
have  no  right  to  undertake  to  represent  them ; I have  no 
authority  delegated  to  me ; but,  if  I might  speak  for  the  man 
who  had  never  bowed  the  knee  to  Baal,  I should  say  that 
in  Theodore  Frelinghuysen  you  have  hit  upon  the  man  of 
their  heart,  and  upon  the  man  to  whom  they  will  give  their 
cheerful,  unbounded  support. 

Fellow  citizens,  I cannot  talk  here.  My  voice  is  not  able 
to  fill  this  Park — it  is  not  loud  enough  to  reach  the  ears  of 
the  multitude  here.  I can  promise  you  that  I will  do  my 
duty  in  the  campaign  that  has  now  begun.  I can  speak,  too, 
for  the  Whigs  of  the  West  in  this  respect.  They  will  come 
out,  when  the  great  day  of  trial  comes,  with  a spirit  as 
stirring  as  ever  fired  the  bosoms  of  enthusiastic  men,  and 
with  a voice  as  loud,  and  as  resistless,  too,  as  their  own 
Niagara.  Let  us  meet  on  that  day — the  East  and  the  West 
— the  City  of  New  York  and  the  City  of  New  York  of 
the  West.  Buffalo  is  but  New  York  in  miniature.  You, 


406 


EARLY  POLITICAL  SPEECHES. 


then,  of  the  Empire  City,  lead  the  way  and  we  will  fol- 
low. Perched  on  that  proud  banner  over  our  heads  I see 
the  names  of  Clay  and  Frelinghuysen — Henry  Clay  for 
President,  and  Theodore  Frelinghuysen  for  Vice-President. 
Never  were  better  names  enrolled  together.  Never  were 
better  men.  Be  it  our  duty  to  ratify  at  the  polls  the  ratifica- 
tion we  are  making  here. 

AS  WHIG  CANDIDATE  FOR  GOVERNOR,  1 844. 

The  following  September  Mr.  Fillmore  received  the  Whig 
nomination  for  Governor  of  New  York  State,  but  was  de- 
feated at  the  polls  by  Silas  Wright.  At  a meeting  in  Buf- 
falo ratifying  his  nomination,  September  13th,  Mr.  Fillmore 
spoke,  his  remarks  being  preserved  only  in  the  following 
abstract  i1 

He  said  to  be  thus  honored,  not  only  by  the  citizens  of 
the  Empire  State,  but  by  those  in  whose  midst  he  came  a 
poor  and  almost  friendless  boy — to  whom  he  owed  all  that 
he  was,  and'  all  that  he  expected  to  be  in  the  future,  from 
whom  he  had  already  received  the  highest  testimonials  of 
their  confidence  in  his  honor  and  integrity — language  was 
powerless  to  express  the  feelings  of  his  heart  which  was 
now  overpowered  with  gratitude.  He  said,  had  he  con- 
sulted his  own  wishes  and  pecuniary  interests,  he  should  not 
now  occupy  the  position  in  which  he  was  placed,  but  the 
voice  of  the  State  of  New  York,  which  was  only  second 
to  the  voice  of  God,  must  be  obeyed,  and  should  he  be 
elected,  he  would1  endeavor  to  carry  out  these  great  and 
vital  principles,  which  are  and  ever  have  been  the  embodi- 
ment of  the  Whig  party  and  which  are  essential  to  the  wel- 
fare and  prospects  of  our  State. 

He  said  he  hoped  that  no  friend  of  his,  however  warm 
his  attachment  might  be,  would  be  guilty  of  any  dishonor- 
able act  to  effect  his  election  ; so  that  when  the  Whig  flag — 
which  is  now  proudly  and  fearlessly  unfurled,  destined  in 


. Buffalo  Commercial  Advertiser,  September  14,  1844. 


EARLY  POLITICAL  SPEECHES. 


407 


November  to  float  in  triumph  and  victory  over  a large  por- 
tion of  our  Union — so  that  the  joy  and  happiness  that  they 
might  experience,  would  not  be  marred  by  an  unworthy  or 
a dishonorable  reflection.  He  entreated  them  to  enter  the 
contest  with  zeal  and  enthusiasm ; but  as  they  valued  the 
sacredness  of  their  cause,  and  the  stability  of  their  principles, 
to  resort  to  no  unfair  means : that  an  honorable  defeat  was 
better  than  a dishonorable  victory. 

IN  PRAISE  OF  ZACHARY  TAYLOR. 

The  Vice-President-elect  being  in  New  York,  shortly 
after  the  election  of  1848,  the  Whig  General  Committee 
waited  on  him  in  a body,  November  14th,  and  through  the 
Hon.  Philip  Hone,  chairman  of  the  General  Committee, 
tendered  him  their  congratulations.  In  reply  Mr.  Fillmore 
spoke  as  follows : 

Mr.  Chairman:  A compliment  from  a city  like  yours, 
the  Empire  City,  not  only  of  the  Empire  State,  but  the  com- 
mercial emporium  of  our  whole  common  country,  could 
never  be  properly  replied  to  by  me,  even  if  I had  time  to 
prepare;  but  the  suddenness  of  your  announcement,  and 
the  warmth  and  heartiness  with  which  you  have  welcomed 
me,  quite  unfit  me  to  make  any  reply  at  all.  I can  only 
thank  you,  in  my  embarrassment;  but  I am  sure  it  is  not 
to  me  this  tribute  is  rendered,  but  to  the  illustrious  man 
under  whose  name  and  whose  principles  we  have  achieved 
the  brilliant  civil  victory  that  the  telegraph  for  the  week  past 
has  been  sending  to  us.  In  that  man,  and  his  simplicity, 
energy  and  straightforwardness,  I have  the  highest  confi- 
dence. I have  never  had  the  honor  of  taking  him  by  the 
hand,  or  of  meeting  him  face  to  face,  but  I have  studied  well 
his  character,  and  I feel,  therefore,  that  I know  him  well; 
for  it  is  a character  plain  and  open,  to  be  read  by  every- 
body, and  not  of  that  complex  nature  that  deludes  and 
puzzles  the  observer. 


408 


EARLY  POLITICAL  SPEECHES. 


I have  no  doubt  that  under  his  Administration  you  will 
realize  all  the  high  and  patriotic  expectations  that  you  en- 
tertain, and  that  the  country  will  receive  an  impetus  and  a 
direction,  under  his  honest  hands,  that  will  go  far,  not  only 
to  make  it  flourish,  but  to  make  its  institutions  endure.  I 
look  to  him  with  confidence  for  a restoration  of  sound  repub- 
lican principles,  and  for  an  Administration  of  honest  men ; 
and  with  him,  I am  sure,  we  shall  have  the  government  of 
the  popular  voice — not  the  expression  of  the  arbitrary  will 
of  one  man.  What  the  people  demand,  the  people  will  have, 
and  upon  them  will  depend  the  success  of  the  Administration 
of  Zachary  Taylor. 

Gentlemen,  I thank  you  heartily  for  the  kindness  with 
which  you  have  welcomed  me,  and  I wish  you  all  happiness 
and  prosperity. 


THE  OPENING  OF  THE 


NEW  YORK  & ERIE  RAILROAD 


The  New  York  & Erie  Railroad  was  opened  to  traffic 
from  the  seaboard  to  Lake  Erie,  in  May,  1851.  The  direc- 
tors invited  President  Fillmore,  his  Cabinet  and  many  other 
distinguished  officials  and  men  of  affairs,  to  make  a tour 
over  the  line.  President  Fillmore  accepted  the  invitation, 
as  did  Mr.  Webster  and  others  of  his  Cabinet.  On  May 
13th  the  President  and  party  arrived  at  Amboy,  N.  J.,  where 
they  were  met  by  President  Loder  and  other  officials  of  the 
Erie.  They  were  conducted  on  board  the  steamboat  Erie, 
and  on  the  way  to  New  York,  Mr.  Charles  M.  Leupp,  chair- 
man of  the  arrangements  committee,  made  an  address  of 
welcome  to  the  President  and  his  party,  to  which  President 
Fillmore  responded : 

I beg  to  return  to  you,  dear  sir,  and  the  committee  of 
arrangements,  my  thanks,  and  through  you,  to  the  Directors 
of  the  Erie  Railroad  Company,  for  the  very  cordial  welcome 
you  have  given  me  and  my  associates,  on  the  occasion  of  my 
visit  to  my  native  State.  I assure  you  that  we  fully  appre- 
ciate the  great  enterprise  you  have  now  so  happily  com- 
pleted. I know  full  well  the  difficulties  under  which  you 
have  labored  in  the  accomplishment  of  this  important  work, 
and  it  is  due  to  you,  as  the  representatives  of  the  Board  of 
Directors,  that  the  chief  officer  of  the  Nation  should  recog- 
nize it.  It  is  the  most  costly  and  greatest  work  of  its  kind 
on  this  continent,  and  in  the  world,  with  one  exception.  You 
say  that  the  work  is  designed  to  connect  Lake  Erie  with  the 


409 


410 


OPENING  OF  THE  ERIE  RAILROAD. 


ocean.  It  is  designed  to  do  more — to  bind  the  affections  of 
distant  sections  in  one  indissoluble  bond  of  the  Union.  I 
need  not  say  that  I feel  proud  of  an  achievement  in  my 
native  State  which  adds  dignity  and  glory  and  strength  to 
the  whole  country. 

On  reaching  New  York  on  the  afternoon  of  the  14th,  the 
party  disembarked  at  Castle  Garden,  and  the  President  was 
conducted  to  a platform,  where,  after  a National  salute  was 
fired,  he  was  introduced  to  the  assemblage  by  Mayor  Kings- 
land.  Replying  to  an  address  of  welcome,  President  Fill- 
more said : 

Mr.  Mayor  and  Fellow-Citizens:  I have  neither  the 
voice  nor  the  language  to  express  the  grateful  emotion  of 
my  heart,  for  this  cordial  reception  of  the  citizens  of  my 
native  State.  If  this  be  a day  on  which  you  have  reason  to 
congratulate  yourselves,  how  much  more  reason  have  I to 
do  so,  the  guest  of  a city  which  is  the  grand  emporium  of 
the  Union,  whose  commerce  whitens  every  sea,  and  which  is 
now  connected  with  the  last  link  of  the  West.  I congratu- 
late you,  fellow-citizens,  that  we  now  stand  on  consecrated 
ground.  Here  in  this  city  the  immortal  Washington  took 
his  oath  to  support  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States; 
here  the  first  Congress  assembled ; and  here  I see  the  same 
city,  and  patriotism,  as  bright  and  as  brilliant  as  they  were 
on  that  auspicious  day.  If  I could  for  a moment  appropriate 
these  honors,  I should  be  overwhelmed  by  my  feelings ; but 
I know  it  is  not  intended  for  me. 

I know  that  this  exhibition  of  feeling  and  patriotism  is 
only  an  evidence  of  your  devotion  to  your  country,  and  of 
your  loyalty  to  the  Union. 

Mr.  Mayor,  you  have  done  the  noble  spirits  with  whom 
I am  associated,  no  more  than  justice,  in  attributing  to  them 
all  that  I have  been  able  to  accomplish  for  the  benefit  of  our 
common  country ; and,  sir,  I beg  leave  to  return  to  you,  and 
through  you,  to  the  citizens  of  this  great  city,  my  most 
grateful  thanks  for  the  kind  assistance  which  they  gave  me 


OPENING  OF  THE  ERIE  RAILROAD. 


411 


under  the  most  trying  circumstances — at  all  times  true  to 
themselves,  true  to  the  Constitution,  and  true  to  the  country. 
I again  return  you,  and  them,  my  most  grateful  acknowledg- 
ments. 

The  excursionists  set  out  for  Lake  Erie  on  the  morning 
of  the  14th.1  At  Piermont,  the  Erie’s  terminal  opposite  New 
York,  the  President  made  a brief  address,  as  he  did  at  a few 
other  points  on  the  line.  At  Binghamton,  where  a great 
throng  surrounded  the  train,  the  President  appeared  on  the 
car  platform  and  in  the  course  of  brief  remarks,  said : 

The  poet  says, 

“Full  many  a flower  is  born  to  blush  unseen 
And  waste  its  fragrance  on  the  desert  air.” 

but  this  can  no  longer  be  said  of  Binghamton,  or  of  the  other 
flashing  villages  on  the  track  of  a railroad  which  connects 
the  Atlantic  with  Lake  Erie. 

On  May  16th  President  Fillmore  and  several  members  of 
his  Cabinet  and  other  distinguished  guests  arrived  in  Buffalo 
by  steamboat  from  Dunkirk.  They  were  received  at  the 
wharf  by  Mayor  James  Wadsworth,  by  Maj.  Gen.  Randall, 
marshal  of  the  day,  and  the  65th  Regiment,  N.  Y.  State 
Militia,  which  acted  as  escort.  A great  civic  and  military 
procession  accompanied  the  President  through  the  streets. 
At  the  Court  House  Park  the  Mayor  made  an  address  of 
welcome,  to  which  Mr.  Fillmore  responded: 

1.  Probably  the  best  account  of  this  famous  excursion  is  that  given  by 
Edward  Harold  Mott  in  his  book,  “Between  the  Ocean  and  the  Lakes.  The 
Story  of  Erie,”  New  York,  1899;  4to,  pp.  51 1.  A large  number  of  Govern- 
ment and  State  officials,  and  other  prominent  men,  were  the  guests  of  the  rail- 
road company  and  made  the  trip  either  in  whole  or  part,  between  New  York 
and  Dunkirk,  the  western  terminus.  Mr.  Fillmore  was  the  guest  of  chief 
distinction,  but  popular  enthusiasm  along  the  route  was  equally  shown  towards 
him  and  Daniel  Webster.  The  latter  set  out  on  the  jaunt  “on  a flat  car,  at 
his  own  request,  a big  easy  rocking-chair  being  provided  for  him  to  sit  on. 
He  chose  this  manner  of  riding  so  that  he  could  better  view  and  enjoy  the  fine 
country  through  which  the  railroad  passed.” 


412 


OPENING  OF  THE  ERIE  RAILROAD. 


RECEPTION  OF  PRESIDENT  FILLMORE  IN  BUFFALO. 

Mr.  Mayor  and  Fellow-Citizens:  I need  not  say  that 
I feel  grateful  for  this  reception  from  my  friends  and  neigh- 
bors. I am  oppressed  and  overwhelmed  by  the  cordiality — 
by  the  unanimity  with  which  you  have  come  to  greet  me  on 
my  return  home.  It  is  a reception  with  which  any  Roman 
General,  in  the  palmiest  days  of  the  Commonwealth,  might 
have  been  satisfied.  I can  hardly  persuade  myself  that  it  is 
a reality.  It  seems  more  like  some  hallucination  of  the 
mind.  But  no ! — here  is  the  reality,  in  the  thousands  of  this 
mighty  throng. 

I came  among  you,  not  many  years  ago,  a friendless  boy. 
For  all  that  I am,  for  all  that  I hope  to  be,  for  all  that  I can 
hope  to  do  for  my  country,  I am  indebted  to  you.  And  I 
hope  to  be  permitted  to  return  to  you  and  spend  my  days 
with  you,  and  at  last  to  sleep  in  yonder  graveyard  and  mingle 
my  dust  with  yours.  The  tempest-tossed  mariner,  the  mer- 
chant who  journeys  in  distant  climes  in  search  of  wealth, 
the  Californian  miner  who  leaves  his  home  to  dig  for  gold 
far  away,  return  to  their  early  associates  to  enjoy  the  fruits 
of  their  labor.  So  with  me.  Whatever  of  honor  I may 
have  acquired,  whatever  of  distinction  among  my  country- 
men has  fallen  upon  me,  would  be  valueless  unless  enjoyed 
with  you.  But  I am  aware  that  all  this  honor,  all  this  gener- 
ous enthusiasm,  all  these  marks  of  respect  and  confidence, 
are  not  intended  for  me  personally.  It  is  the  high  office, 
which  through  an  afflicting  dispensation  of  Providence  I 
now  fill,  that  has  called  forth  this  spontaneous  gathering  of 
thousands.  All  classes  are  mingled  before  me,  all  political 
considerations  are  thrown  aside,  and  I receive  this  tribute 
as  I did  the  “Welcome”  stretched  across  your  main  street — 
as  I did  the  flowers  that  were  thrown  into  the  carriage  as  we 
passed  along,  as  the  offerings  of  patriotism  to  the  high 
office  of  Chief  Magistrate  of  the  country. 

Your  Mayor  has  generously  and  with  general  approval 
referred  to  my  Administration.  I was  called  to  my  present 
position  by  a painful  dispensation.  It  was  at  a time  of  great 


OPENING  OF  THE  ERIE  RAILROAD. 


413 


peril  to  the  Constitution  and  to  the  country.  In  the  course 
which  I have  felt  compelled,  from  a firm  conviction  of  duty, 
to  pursue,  I am  not  unaware  that  I have  lost  the  confidence 
and  support  of  many  whose  friendship  I highly  value.  But 
there  was  no  alternative  left  me — no  other  path  to  pursue, 
and  preserve  our  cherished  institutions,  and  hand  them  and 
their  blessings  down  to  posterity.  And  it  is  gratifying  to 
know,  and  it  is  with  pleasure  that  I am  permitted  to  speak 
of  it,  that  this  spirit  was  not  confined  to  any  class.  It  is 
not  to  me  alone,  nor  to  those  distinguished  gentlemen  to 
whom  I owe  whatever  of  success  has  attended  my  Admin- 
istration, that  the  country  is  indebted  for  the  happy  termina- 
tion of  our  difficulties.  As  partizans  we  may  differ — ques- 
tions as  to  the  manner  in  which  the  Government  shall  be 
administered  may  divide  us.  But  when  the  Union  is  en- 
dangered— when  treason  stalks  abroad  at  the  South  and 
rears  its  snaky  head  at  the  North,  all  rally  to  its  support. 
All  classes,  all  parties  forget  their  differences  and  make  a 
common  cause  against  the  common  foe.  Distinguished 
Democrats,  one  of  whom  [Senator  Douglas,  of  Illinois]  is 
by  my  side  now,  gave  me  their  confidence  and  support,  and 
came  forward  nobly  in  the  cause  of  patriotism  to  save  the 
Union  and  the  Government.  It  was  then  that  they  stood  by 
me  in  my  humble  efforts  to  preserve  the  integrity  of  the 
Constitution. 

Your  Mayor  has  alluded  to  the  measures  adopted  by  the 
Administration  to  preserve  our  neutrality  and  to  prevent  the 
invasion  of  the  territory  of  a friendly  power.  In  doing  what 
I have,  I was  but  discharging  my  duty,  and  acting  upon 
those  principles  which  have  governed  the  policy  of  the  Gov- 
ernment from  the  beginning,  in  its  intercourse  with  other 
nations.  If  we  depart  from  this  policy  we  shall  array  all 
the  other  Powers  against  us.  There  is  no  liberty,  no  se- 
curity, without  law.  The  law,  whatever  it  is,  must  be  en- 
forced. If  any  portion  of  our  people  are  permitted  to  rush 
headlong  to  the  conquest  of  Cuba,  it  would  weaken  or 
destroy  the  confidence  of  other  nations  in  the  integrity  of 
our  neutrality,  and  we  should  soon  find  ourselves  placed 


414 


OPENING  OF  THE  ERIE  RAILROAD. 


beyond  the  pale  of  international  law  and  international 
comity.  Congress  wisely  made  such  invasion  of  the  terri- 
tory of  friendly  nations  a criminal  offence.  And  I have 
sworn  upon  the  Holy  Evangelists  to  execute  the  laws,  of  all 
kinds, — I have  endeavored  to  the  best  of  my  ability  to  exe- 
cute them.  I intend  to  execute  them,  and,  God  helping  me,  I 
will  execute  them. 

But  I did  not  rise  to  make  a speech.  This  is  not  a 
fitting  occasion  to  dwell  upon  grave  affairs  of  state.  I rise 
to  give  vent,  fully,  to  the  grateful  emotions  of  my  heart. 
But  in  the  overpowering  strength  of  the  feelings,  called  into 
action  by  the  scenes  around  me — by  the  warm  confidence  of 
my  fellow-citizens,  as  shown  in  the  thousands  before  me — I 
can  but  faintly  tell  you  all  I feel.  When  I look  upon  your 
familiar  faces  they  seem  to  me  like  the  faces  of  brothers  and 
sisters.  I again  thank  you  for  this  reception.  I thank  you, 
Mr.  Mayor,  for  the  cordiality  with  which,  on  behalf  of  your 
fellow-citizens,  you  have  welcomed  me  to  this  my  cherished 
home.1 


AT  ROCHESTER. 

Returning  East  from  Buffalo,  President  Fillmore  reached 
Rochester  on  May  20th.  There  he  spoke  to  a great  throng 
in  Washington  Square,  May  21st,  as  follows: 

Whoever  can  look  upon  a spectacle  like  this  unmoved, 
must  be  more  than  mortal.  For  myself,  I thank  you  from 

1.  “Never,”  said  the  Buffalo  Commercial  Advertiser,  in  commenting  on 
this  tour,  “since  the  tour  of  Monroe  in  1817,  has  a President  been  received 
throughout  the  country  with  such  hospitable  warmth — such  universal  cordiality 
and  heartiness.”  Other  speakers  on  this  occasion  included  Secretary  Graham 
of  the  Navy,  Postmaster-General  Hall,  Governor  Hunt  and  Stephen  A.  Douglas. 
The  celebration  culminated  in  a wonderful  banquet  at  the  Mansion  House. 

The  Common  Council  of  Buffalo  had  made  suitable  preparations  for  the 
reception  of  the  President  and  those  members  of  his  Cabinet  who  might  accom- 
pany him.  At  a meeting,  May  nth,  the  following  telegram  was  read: 

“To  the  Hon . James  Wadsworth,  Mayor  of  Buffalo: 

“We  shall  be  in  New  York  on  Tuesday.  Receive  your  committee  at  Dun- 
kirk on  Thursday,  and  leave  that  evening  or  Friday  morning  to  visit  Buffalo. 
With  many  thanks  for  your  proffered  hospitality, 

“Millard  Fillmore.” 

A municipal  reception  for  the  President  was  arranged  for  May  16th,  the 
president  and  directors  of  the  Erie  Railroad  and  the  president  and  trustees 
of  Dunkirk  and  other  western  towns  being  invited  to  attend. 


OPENING  OF  THE  ERIE  RAILROAD. 


415 


the  bottom  of  my  heart,  for  this  generous  and  hearty  recep- 
tion, both  to  myself  and  to  the  distinguished  gentlemen,  who 
form  a part  of  my  Administration.  That  flag  [pointing  to 
the  American  flag  stretched  out  before  him,  and  upon  which 
was  painted  in  large  letters,  “The  Union  Forever”]  speaks 
for  the  common  country,  of  which  you,  fellow-citizens,  are 
a part.  I have  to  thank  you  again  and  again,  for  this  wel- 
come to  my  native  State  and  to  my  Western  home. 

You  have  alluded  to  the  fact,  that  I have  attended  the 
opening  of  a most  important  public  work,  the  New  York  & 
Erie  Railroad.  It  is  one  of  the  most  stupendous  works  in 
the  world,  and  I rejoice  that  it  is  my  own  native  State, 
which  has  displayed  the  zeal,  which  has  been  manifested  in 
the  completion  of  this  work,  and  in  others  which  have  dis- 
tinguished our  people. 

As  a general  rule,  it  has1  been  supposed  that  nations  and 
states  alone  could  accomplish  such  works  as  these,  but  the 
Erie  Railroad  has  been  built  at  a cost  of  $23,000,000,  and 
accomplished  all  of  it  by  the  enterprise  of  individuals  in 
this  State.  It  was  a work  which  excelled  in  magnitude  that 
begun  by  the  Autocrat  of  all  the  Russias,  for  the  road 
between  St.  Petersburg  and'  Moscow  was  commenced  ante- 
rior to  this,  and  the  Erie  road  is  now  completed  before  the 
Russian  road  is  finished. 

The  completion  of  the  Erie  Canal  is  another  public 
improvement,  to  which  the  Mayor  has  alluded.  This  is  a 
work  of  which  the  citizens  of  Western  New  York  and  all 
the  citizens  west  of  New  York,  ought  to  be  proud,  and 
which  they  all  ought  to  hasten  to  completion.  I have 
watched  the  progress  of  this  work  from  its  inception  by 
DeWitt  Clinton,  down  to  the  present  time.  I have  seen 
with  regret  how  much  capital  has  been  lost  from  the  non- 
completion of  the  whole  work,  from  the  abandonment  of 
certain  parts  while  in  process  of  completion.  Gentlemen, 
while  one  lock  remains  unfinished,  or  one  division  uncom- 
pleted, it  is  the  loss  of  the  labor  and  capital  which  may  have 
been  expended  in  giving  a start  to  the  work.  The  only  way 
to  make  it  profitable  is  to  complete  the  whole  work,  and  then 
it  will  be  alike  available  and  valuable  to  all. 


416 


OPENING  OF  THE  ERIE  RAILROAD. 


It  has  been  said  that  the  Erie  Canal  would  be  completed 
before  the  expiration  of  another  Presidential  term.  Sin- 
cerely was  I glad  to  hear  the  remark,  and  whoever  may  be 
my  successor  in  office,  I hope  he  may  deem  the  enterprise 
of  sufficient  importance  to  countenance  and  encourage  such 
a work  by  his  presence.1 

You  have  alluded  to  the  humble  part  I have  taken  in 
defence  of  the  Constitution  and  the  Union.  I feel,  gentle- 
men, that  the  highest  honor  for  any  success  which  has 
attended  the  measures  of  my  Administration,  belongs  rather 
to  the  distinguished  gentlemen  called  around  me  for  advice. 
The  honor  belongs  mainly  to  them. 

Regardless  of  party  consideration,  when  the  great  public 
measures  of  the  day  were  before  Congress,  they  and  I acted. 
They  were  men  selected  by  me  for  their  wise  discretion,  and 
I have  been  most  happy  to  know  that  my  choice  met  with 
the  public  approval  and  expectation. 

Whatever  has  been  done  to  avert  the  public  calamity 
which  threatened  the  country,  belongs  to  men  of  all  parties, 
who,  within  Congress  and  out  of  it,  rallied  around  the 
Administration  in  order  to  strengthen  the  arm  of  Govern- 
ment and  maintain  the  supremacy  of  the  laws. 

Again  I return  you  my  most  cordial  and  profound  thanks 
for  the  honor  of  this  most  brilliant  reception. 

At  a banquet  given  at  Rochester  in  the  President’s  honor, 
some  200  persons1  attended.  The  Hon.  N.  E.  Paine  propos- 
ing the  toast : “The  President  of  the  United  States  and  his 
Cabinet,”  Mr.  Fillmore  responded.  He  said  in  substance, 
that  he  felt  himself  in  the  midst  of  friends ; he  begged  all 
to  wait  before  pronouncing  judgment  on  his  course,  and 
“still  award  me  the  credit  of  having  been  governed  by  dis- 
interested convictions  of  duty  to  my  country.” 

i.  A voice  in  the  crowd  interrupted  him:  “That  man  shall  be  Millard 
Fillmore,”  and  this  sentiment  was  loudly  cheered. 


VARIOUS  ADDRESSES. 


417 


WELCOME  TO  THE  FRENCH  MINISTER. 

A new  Minister  of  France,  M.  de  Sartiges,  having 
arrived  at  his  post  at  Washington,  was  received  by  the 
President,  May  29,  1851,  with  these  words: 

Sir:  I am  happy  to  welcome  you  as  the  representative 

of  France,  and  to  receive  from  you  as  such,  the  renewed 
assurance  of  friendship  and  sympathy  on  the  part  of  your 
Government  and  country  towards  the  United  States.  Our 
friendship  for  France  originated  with  our  struggle  for  a 
national  existence,  and  was  cemented  by  the  mingling  of 
the  blood  of  our  revolutionary  sires  with  that  of  their  allies 
the  heroes  of  France;  and,  through  all  the  various  political 
changes  of  your  great  and  enlightened  country,  a deep  senti- 
ment of  national  sympathy  has  pervaded  this  people,  rejoic- 
ing in  your  prosperity,  and  hailing  with  unaffected  delight, 
your  recent  advent  among  the  nations  of  the  earth  as  a sister 
republic.  I beg  leave  to  assure  you  that  nothing  shall  be 
wanting  on  my  part  to  maintain  and  strengthen  the  friendly 
relations  which  now  exist  between  the  two  Governments, 
and  to  draw  more  closely  the  ties  which  bind  them  to  each 
other.  As  one  means  of  accomplishing  this  desirable  object, 
I again  welcome  you  to  our  shores  as  the  diplomatic  agent 
of  the  leading  republic  of  Europe. 

LAYING  THE  CORNER-STONE  OF  THE  CAPITOL  ADDITION. 

President  Fillmore  presided  at  the  ceremony  of  laying  the 
corner-stone  for  the  addition  to  the  Capitol,  July  4,  1851. 
The  programme  called  for  no  formal  address  by  him,  the 
orator  of  the  occasion  being  Daniel  Webster.1 

1.  In  his  address  on  this  occasion  Mr.  Webster,  turning  to  the  President, 

said: 

“President  Fillmore,  it  is  your  singularly  good  fortune  to  perform  an  act 
such  as  that  which  the  earliest  of  your  predecessors  performed  fifty-eight  years 
ago.  You  stand  where  he  stood;  you  lay  your  hand  on  the  corner-stone  of  a 
building  designed  greatly  to  extend  that  whose  corner-stone  he  laid.  Changed, 
changed  is  everything  around.  The  same  sun,  indeed,  shone  upon  his  head 
which  now  shines  upon  yours.  The  same  broad  river  rolled  at  his  feet,  and 
bathes  his  last  resting  place,  that  now  rolls  at  yours.  But  the  site  of  this 


418 


VARIOUS  ADDRESSES. 


AT  WHITE  SULPHUR  SPRINGS. 

In  August,  1851,  President  Fillmore  sought  a brief  rest 
at  White  Sulphur  Springs,  Va.  Here  he  was  welcomed  by 
the  citizens,  at  a formal  reception.  To  the  chairman's  greet- 
ing the  President  replied : 

Mr.  Chairman  : I left  Washington  with  the  intention 
of  seeking  in  this  beautiful  and  romantic  retreat  among  the 
mountains  of  Virginia  a little  relaxation  from  the  weari- 
some round  of  official  labors.  I desired  a few  days  to  ex- 
change the  heat  and  dust  of  the  city  for  the  cool  breezes  and 
health-giving  fountains  of  this  delightful  region.  My  inten- 
tion was  to  pass  quietly  along,  avoiding  all  ceremony  and 
all  display ; but  that  man  must  be  more  or  less  than  human 
who  could  be  insensible  to  the  flattering  attentions  and  gen- 
erous hospitality  which  I have  received  everywhere  since  I 
entered  the  State  of  Virginia ; and  for  this  most  unexpected 
but  cordial  welcome,  from  my  fellow-citizens  here  assem- 
bled, I beg  leave  to  return  my  heartfelt  thanks. 

I concur  with  you  in  the  just  encomiums  which  you  have 
been  pleased  to  bestow  upon  those  distinguished  gentlemen 
who  forgot  party  animosities  when  they  saw  their  country 
in  danger,  and  nobly  rushed  to  the  rescue.  I trust  that  a 
grateful  country  will  duly  appreciate  their  patriotic  efforts 
and  disinterested  devotion.  To  them  we  are  chiefly  indebted 
for  the  returning  peace  and  quiet  that  now  pervade  the 
country. 

You  have  been  pleased  to  speak  of  my  humble  efforts  in 
this  great  and  glorious  work.  I claim  no  merit  for  myself 


city  was  then  mainly  an  open  field.  Streets  and  avenues  have  since  been 
laid  out  and  completed,  squares  and  public  grounds  enclosed  and  ornamented, 
until  the  city  which  bears  his  name,  although  comparatively  inconsiderable  in 
numbers  and  wealth,  has  become  quite  fit  to  be  the  seat  of  government  of  a 
great  and  united  people.  Sir,  may  the  consequences  of  the  duty  which  you 
perform  so  auspiciously  today  equal  those  which  flowed  from  his  act.  Nor 
this  only;  may  the  principles  of  your  Administration,  and  the  wisdom  of  your 
political  conduct,  be  such  as  that  the  world  of  the  present  day,  and  all  history 
hereafter,  may  be  at  no  loss  to  perceive  what  example  you  have  made  your 
study.” 


VARIOUS  ADDRESSES. 


419 


my  duty  was  a plain  one,  however  difficult  it  was  to  perform. 
I determined  from  the  moment  I entered  upon  the  admin- 
istration of  the  Government,  to  take  the  Constitution  and 
laws  for  my  guide,  and,  in  the  execution  of  the  powers  con- 
fided to  me,  to  know  no  North,  no  South,  no  East,  no  West, 
but  my  country,  my  whole  country,  one  and  indivisible. 

Having  no  selfish  objects  to  subserve,  I have  steadily 
acted  upon  this  principle,  and,  next  to  the  approbation  of 
my  own  conscience,  is  the  gratification  which  I feel  at  know- 
ing that  it  meets  the  approval  of  my  fellow-citizens. 

If  any  merit  be  due  for  the  manner  in  which  my  Admin- 
istration has  been  conducted,  give  it  to  those  with  whom  I 
am  associated,  who  have  at  all  times,  and  under  all  circum- 
stances, unitedly  stood  by  me  and  sustained  me  in  every 
effort  to  maintain  our  glorious  Constitution. 

I am  most  happy  to  meet  here  the  social  representatives 
from  so  many  States.  This  may  well  be  deemed  a social 
Congress,  composed  of  representatives  from  all  parts  of  the 
country — Whigs  and  Democrats,  and  ladies,  who  know  no 
party  distinction,  but  are  united  in  support  of  our  glorious 
Union.  I anticipate  much  pleasure  in  my  intercourse  with 
such  a Congress,  and  beg  leave,  most  cordially,  to  unite  with 
you  in  the  expression  of  the  hope  that,  from  this  moment 
forward,  during  the  few  days  which  I shall  have  the  pleasure 
of  remaining  with  you,  all  official  distinctions  may  be  for- 
gotten, and  that  we  may  meet  upon  the  common  level  in  the 
enjoyment  of  that  unreserved  social  intercourse  which  con- 
stitutes the  highest  enjoyment  of  life.  Again  I thank  you 
cordially  for  the  very  kind  and  flattering  manner  in  which 
you  have  been  pleased'  to  receive  me  as  a guest  among  you. 


NEW  ENGLAND  VISIT  OF  1851 


) 


In  September,  1851,  President  Fillmore  visited  New 
England,  accompanied  by  Hon.  A.  H.  H.  Stuart,  Secretary  of 
the  Interior,  and  Hon.  C.  M.  Conrad,  Secretary  of  War. 
The  especial  occasion  was  the  opening  of  new  railway  lines, 
connecting  Boston  with  Canada  and  the  West.  At  Newport, 
on  the  1 6th,  he  was  welcomed  by  Lieutenant-Governor 
William  B.  Lawrence,  then  acting  Governor  of  Rhode 
Island,  to  whose  address  the  President  responded: 

REMARKS  AT  NEWPORT. 

I feel  most  happy  in  having  this  opportunity  of  visiting 
Rhode  Island,  a State  which,  though  the  last  to  come  into 
the  Union,  has  ever  been  among  the  foremost  in  sustaining 
the  Constitution,  and  maintaining  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciples upon  which  our  Republic  was  founded.  Toward  her 
have  all  eyes  ever  been  steadfastly  turned,  in  the  full  con- 
fidence that  her  anchor  will  continue  to  hold  firm  and  fast. 

Later,  being  waited  upon  and  addressed  by  committees 
appointed  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of 
Massachusetts,  the  President  replied : 

Gentlemen:  This  very  unexpected  and  certainly  unde- 
served compliment  on  the  part  of  your  Legislature  in  thus 
sending  a committee  to  welcome  me  to  the  bounds  of  your 
favored  State,  I can  assure  you  is  deeply  appreciated  by  me. 

The  occasion  you  are  about  to  celebrate  is  one  in  which 
I feel  a great  interest,  both  personally  and  politically.  In 
such  works  as  these  you  now  propose  to  commemorate,  we 


420 


NEW  ENGLAND  VISIT  OF  1851. 


421 


all  have  an  immediate  concern.  And  allow  me,  sir,  to  re- 
mark, that  in  these  very  works  and  enterprises,  your  State 
has  won  a noble  and  an  enviable  reputation.  She  has 
stretched  forth  her  iron  arms  and  embraced  not  only  the 
Great  West,  New  Hampshire,  and  New  York,  but  Vermont 
and  the  Canadas.  I am  glad  to  see  this  annexation,  although 
I am  not  in  favor  of  annexation  in  a certain  sense,  because 
I think  we  have  territory  enough.  I am,  however,  in  favor 
of  all  these  enterprises  which  are  instrumental  in  developing 
our  present  almost  illimitable  resources  and  extending  our 
commerce.  In  fostering  and  building  up  the  advantages  we 
already  possess  lies,  I am  inclined  to  think,  our  true  course. 
And  it  is  on  account  of  her  progress  in  this  path,  that  I think 
your  city  to  be  especially  deserving  of  commendation.  She 
originated  those  vast  schemes  of  internal  improvement,  their 
private  enterprise,  which  have  redounded  to  her  profit  and 
credit  and  which  New  York  has  so  successfully  emulated 
and  which  other  cities  with  a noble  rivalship,  have  not  failed 
to  imitate. 


AT  FALL  RIVER. 

At  Fall  River,  on  the  17th,  the  President  was  again  met 
by  reception  committees.  Henry  Wilson,  President  of  the 
Massachusetts  State  Senate,  in  a speech  of  some  length, 
extended  to  him  the  official  invitation  of  the  Commonwealth. 
Mr.  Fillmore  replied: 

Mr.  Chairman:  This  unexpected  welcome  and  cordial 
reception  meets  a most  grateful  response  in  my  bosom.  I 
know  full  well  that  this  reception  and  these  honors  are  not 
intended  for  me  personally,  but  are  rather  accorded  to  the 
public  office  which  it  is  my  duty  to  fill.  As  such  I receive 
them ; and  with  more  pleasure  than  if  tendered  to  me  per- 
sonally, because  I see  in  them  a guarantee  of  devotion  of 
Massachusetts  to  the  Union  and  the  Constitution  of  her 
beloved  country.  I rejoice  in  this  event  and  am  most  happy 
to  be  among  you.  Deeply  did  I regret  that  on  a former  occa- 
sion it  was  not  in  my  power  to  accept  your  gracious  invita- 


422 


NEW  ENGLAND  VISIT  OF  1851. 


tion.  I am  now  traveling  over  what  is  to  me,  new  country, 
and  am  truly  gratified  to  view  this  flourishing  town  which 
has  sprung  into  beauty  and  wealth,  almost  in  a day,  exhibit- 
ing in  its  every  structure  results  of  an  intelligent  and  liberal 
enterprise.  Myself  and  associates  are  indeed  happy  to  meet 
you  here  upon  the  soil  of  the  Bay  State ; we  know  its  history 
and  are  proud  of  it  as  one  of  the  sisters  of  our  Federal 
Union.  It  will  afford  us  much  pleasure  to  spend  some  time 
with  you,  and  become  acquainted  with  your  people,  your 
institutions  and  your  public  works.  Again  I return  my 
heartfelt  thanks  for  the  kind  attentions  you  have  shown  us. 

AT  DORCHESTER. 

At  Dorchester,  on  the  way  to  Boston,  the  President  was 
again  called  on  to  acknowledge  the  courtesies  of  the  Mayor 
and  local  reception  committee.  He  said : 

Mr.  Chairman  : On  behalf  of  myself  and  associates  I 
return  you  profound  thanks  for  this  cordial  greeting.  I 
know  that  we  stand  in  sight  of  those  heights  which  defended 
us  in  the  days  past  from  the  despotism  of  Europe,  and  I 
can  well  understand  that  I am  in  the  land  of  those  who  re- 
ceived a Constitution  which  they  were  prepared  to  defend. 
As  such  I accept  your  welcome. 

AT  ROXBURY. 

The  entrance  to  Roxbury  was  in  an  open  barouche  drawn 
by  six  gray  horses.  An  escort  was  supplied  by  the  National 
Lancers  of  Boston  and  a cavalcade  of  some  two  hundred 
citizens  of  Roxbury.  A thousand  children,  “all  having  their 
dresses  trimmed  with  evergreens,”  were  drawn  up  in  line 
on  Meeting  House  Hill.  There  were  arches,  bands  of 
music,  a vast  throng,  and  floral  decorations  all  along  the 
route.  To  the  address  of  welcome  by  Mayor  Walker  of 
Roxbury,  Mr.  Fillmore  responded: 


NEW  ENGLAND  VISIT  OF  1851. 


423 


Mr.  Mayor:  Permit  me  to  return  to  you,  and  through 
you  as  the  Chief  Executive  officer  of  this  City,  my  thanks  for 
this  cordial  welcome.  I cannot  doubt  its  sincerity.  When  I 
see  your  streets  lined  with  people  and  strewn  with  flowers, 
and  behold  the  bright  and  joyous  eyes  turned  towards  the 
carriage  as  we  pass,  I am  sure  I am  welcome.  I regret  that 
time  will  not  permit  me  to  reply  properly  to  your  allusion  to 
your  sister  city.  Though  not  equalling  her  in  population, 
you  have  a pleasant  location,  and  present  evidences  of  pros- 
perity and  happiness.  I have  been  gratified  with  much  that 
I have  seen  since  I entered  your  State,  and  especially  with 
your  common  schools,  those  institutions  which  supply  our 
youth  with  education  and  instill  those  principles  which  will 
lead  them,  as  they  succeed  us,  to  receive,  support,  and  main- 
tain the  Constitution,  the  Union  and  the  laws. 

IN  BOSTON. 

The  procession  passed  on  into  Boston,  where  bodies  of 
troops  gave  a military  character  to  this  triumphal  progress. 
Surrounded  by  a squad  of  artillery,  the  President  listened 
to  the  address  of  welcome  by  Mayor  Bigelow,  and  responded 
as  follows: 

Mr.  Mayor  : I receive  from  you,  as  representative  of  this 
proud  city,  the  flattering  welcome  you  offer  me,  with  pro- 
found gratitude  and  deep  emotion.  You  have  alluded  to 
the  fact  that  this  is  the  anniversary  of  the  completion  of  the 
Constitution,  and  of  the  first  visit  of  Washington  to  this 
spot.  What  a contrast  is  presented  now,  to  the  day  when 
the  Father  of  his  Country  visited  you,  not  to  receive  your 
attention  and  welcome,  but  to  defend  you  from  the  despotism 
and  oppression  of  the  Mother  Country!  If  I mistake  not, 
the  son  of  Virginia  was  appointed  Commander-in-Chief  of 
the  forces  of  the  United  Colonies,  and  proceeded  at  once  to 
locate  his  headquarters  in  the  vicinity  of  Boston.  He  made 
the  journey  in  eleven  days,  and  the  people  of  Dorchester  met 
to  congratulate  him  on  the  remarkable  speed  with  which  he 


424 


NEW  ENGLAND  VISIT  OF  1851. 


had  traveled!  How  is  it  that  that  space  which  Washington 
by  use  of  an  express  traversed  in  eleven  days,  is  now  over- 
come by  me  as  a matter  of  pleasure  in  about  as  many  hours  ? 
It  is  because  of  your  intelligent,  far-seeing  and  far-reaching 
enterprise.  You  have  stretched  out  your  iron  arms  towards 
New  York,  and  have  laid  her  under  contribution.  In  every 
direction  is  your  enterprise  impelled  by  that  intelligence 
which  your  system  of  universal  education  gives  to  all  your 
people,  almost  annihilating  time  and  space,  building  up  com- 
merce, facilitating  domestic  and  social  enjoyment,  securing 
your  own  wealth  and  happiness  and  doing  much  for  all  who 
surround  you. 

I rejoice  to  be  among  you;  I am  sure  from  the  welcome 
with  which  I have  been  received  that  you  are  a people  who 
will  maintain  the  city  and  the  laws  at  every  hazard.  Boston 
may  well  be  proud  of  such  a military  display  as  this  and  of 
the  many  other  evidences  of  her  greatness,  which  around 
present  themselves  on  every  hand.  It  only  remains  for  me 
to  return  my  thanks  for  the  kindness  you  have  manifested 
towards  myself  and  associates. 

At  a subsequent  reception,  replying  to  an  address  of  wel- 
come by  the  Governor,  Mr.  Fillmore  said : 

Governor  of  Massachusetts  : Under  no  circumstances 
could  I have  received  such  a welcome  as  through  the  Execu- 
tive head  of  this  great  State,  without  the  deepest  emotions  of 
gratitude.  From  the  moment  that  I crossed  the  line  of  this 
great  State,  it  has  been  one  scene  of  welcome.  You  have 
said  that  your  institutions  of  every  kind  are  open  to  be  in- 
spected by  myself  and  those  associated  with  me ; it  is  grati- 
fying to  be  permitted  to  look  into  the  institutions  of  this 
State,  which  is  perhaps  the  most  flourishing  in  the  Union. 
Sir,  as  I passed  through  this  city  I saw  your  streets  lined  for 
miles  with  multitudes  of  people;  to  witness  the  extreme 
order  that  prevailed,  I could  never  for  a moment  believe  that 
this  community  could  be  brought,  under  any  circumstances, 
to  commit  treason  against  the  United  States. 


NEW  ENGLAND  VISIT  OF  1851. 


425 


Sir,  it  is  my  duty,  and  sometimes  it  has  been  a painful 
one,  to  execute  the  laws  of  this  Union  against  those  who  did 
not  approve  of  them.  This  must  be  the  case  with  all  who 
occupy  the  position  which  I now  do;  but  I see  manifest  in 
this  community  evidence  that  as  far  as  this  city  and  State 
are  concerned,  this  duty  will  hereafter  be  performed  with 
ease  and  satisfaction.  Sir,  I congratulate  you  on  the  proud 
eminence  which  this  State  occupies  in  the  great  world  of 
internal  improvements.  You  have  spread  your  railroads 
and  invited  the  commerce  of  the  West  and  North,  and  you 
are  now  pouring  rich  tributes  into  the  lap  of  this  great  State. 
May  you  and  those  associated  with  you  long  enjoy  these 
blessings.  You  have  taught  your  sister  States  that,  although 
you  do  not  possess  the  power  of  inviting  commerce  by 
canals,  yet  that  there  is  another  mode  of  stretching  forth 
your  Briarean  arms  to  the  farthest  part  of  the  land,  and 
bringing  her  riches  into  your  State. 

Sir,  it  does  not  become  me  to  express  gratitude  for  the 
reception  you  have  extended  to  those  associated  with  me. 
They  are  more  capable  of  doing  it  for  themselves  than  I am. 
Permit  me,  however,  to  say  that  I receive  this  testimony 
of  the  inhabitants  of  Boston  and  Massachusetts  not  as  a 
personal  respect  to  myself,  but  as  an  evidence  of  their  duty 
to  the  Constitution  and  our  glorious  Union,  and  their  deter- 
mination to  sustain  both. 

There  were  various  receptions  and  much  speech-making 
during  the  following  days  of  the  Boston  jubilee,  but  no  more 
extended  addresses  by  the  President.  He  was  the  guest  of 
honor,  with  Lord  Elgin,  at  a great  banquet,  where  the 
President  of  the  United  States  was  duly  toasted.  Hastening 
away  before  the  programme  of  festivities  was  concluded,  he 
returned  to  Washington. 


DISCREET  WORDS  TO  KOSSUTH 


On  December  31,  1851,  the  Hungarian  patriot  Louis 
Kossuth  was  presented  to  the  President  by  Secretary 
Webster,  and  Senators  Seward  and  Shields.  M.  Kossuth 
read  a short  address  to  the  President,  in  which  he  expressed 
his  gratitude  for  himself,  his  associates,  and  his  country, 
for  the  encouragement  and  sympathy  shown  by  our  Gov- 
ernment toward  the  Hungarian  cause.  President  Fillmore 
replied  as  follows: 

I am  happy.  Governor  Kossuth,  to  welcome  you  to  this 
land  of  freedom : and  it  gives  me  pleasure  to  congratulate 
you  upon  your  release  from  a long  confinement  in  Turkey, 
and  your  safe  arrival  here.  As  an  individual,  I sympathized 
deeply  with  you  in  your  brave  struggle  for  the  independence 
and  freedom  of  your  native  land.  The  American  people  can 
never  be  indifferent  to  such  a contest  ; but  our  policy  as  a 
nation,  in  this  respect,  has  been  uniform  from  the  com- 
mencement of  our  Government;  and  my  own  views,  as  the 
chief  magistrate  of  this  nation,  are  fully  and  freely  ex- 
pressed in  my  recent  message  to  Congress,  to  which  you 
have  been  pleased  to  allude.  They  are  the  same,  whether 
speaking  to  Congress  here,  or  to  the  nations  of  Europe. 

Should  your  country  be  restored  to  independence  and 
freedom,  I should  then  wish  you,  as  the  greatest  blessing 
you  could  enjoy,  a restoration  to  your  native  land;  but, 
should  that  never  happen,  I can  only  repeat  my  welcome  to 
you  and  your  companions  here,  and  pray  that  God’s  blessing 
may  rest  upon  you  wherever  your  lot  may  be  cast. 


426 


ON  RETIRING  FROM  OFFICE 


At  the  close  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  term  of  office  as  President, 
in  March,  1853,  his  Washington  friends  gave  him  a farewell 
dinner.  The  Mayor,  the  Hon.  Mr.  Maury,  in  a cordial 
address,  expressed  the  respect  and  good  wishes  of  the  com- 
munity toward  the  President.  Mr.  Fillmore  responded: 

Mr.  Mayor  and  Gentlemen  : This  is  an  honor  which  I 
did  not  anticipate,  and  am  therefore  unprepared  to  express 
in  suitable  language  the  grateful  emotions  which  it  naturally 
inspires.  I can  assure  you,  however,  that  I feel  that  I am 
entitled  to  the  congratulations  of  my  friends  at  the  approach- 
ing termination  of  my  official  labors  and  responsibilities. 
While  I shall  retire  from  this  exalted  station  without  a single 
regret,  I cannot  leave  your  delightful  city,  where  I have 
ever  been  treated  with  so  much  kindness  and  consideration, 
without  feeling  a pang  of  regret  at  the  severance  of  so  many 
social  ties  which  have  been  to  me  sources  of  unalloyed  happi- 
ness. If,  in  the  course  of  my  brief  Administration,  I have 
been  able  to  accomplish  anything  to  promote  the  prosperity 
or  add  to  the  attractions  of  this  lovely  city,  bearing  the  name 
of  the  immortal  Washington,  this  reflection  will  ever  be  to 
me  a source  of  sincere  gratification. 

This  city  stands  upon  a spot  recently  selected  from  the 
wilderness,  and  consecrated  to  the  exclusive  use  and  control 
of  this  great  nation,  and  rendered  an  attractive  object  of 
love  and  admiration  to  the  whole  people.  It  is  the  emblem 
of  our  union,  and  should  be  the  pride  of  every  patriot. 
Acting  upon  these  views,  I have  cheerfully  lent  all  my  efforts 
to  beautify  and  adorn  it,  not  merely  for  the  sake  of  the 


427 


428 


VARIOUS  ADDRESSES. 


residents  of  the  city,  but  as  the  object  of  just  national  pride, 
and  as  a means  of  strengthening  our  glorious  Union. 

With  my  profound  acknowledgments  for  this  signal  mark 
of  your  respect,  and  my  sincere  prayers  for  the  continued 
prosperity  of  your  city,  I bid  you  an  affectionate  farewell! 

FOR  A HOSPITAL  IN  BUFFALO. 

Early  in  1854  several  citizens  of  Buffalo  interested  them- 
selves in  the  establishment  of  a public  hospital.  At  a meet- 
ing held  at  the  Clarendon  Hotel,  February  2d,  the  project 
was  discussed.  Mr.  Fillmore’s  share  in  the  deliberations 
was  reported  by  the  Commercial  Advertiser  as  follows : 

Hon.  M.  Fillmore  wished  to  know  whether  this  was  to  be 
a private  institution,  or  whether  it  was  to  be  like  our  other 
eleemosynary  institutions — the  Poor  House,  etc. — supported 
and  controlled  by  public  officers.  If  the  latter,  would  it  not 
be  proper  to  ask  of  the  Legislature  power  to  levy  a tax  for 
the  purchase  of  a site,  and  the  erection  of  buildings?  This 
he  thought  was  the  best  plan.  All  are  interested  in  it — it 
should  be  supported  by  all.  If,  as  has  been  suggested,  it  is 
specially  to  receive  aid  from  the  Government,  then  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury  might  wish  to  have  some  voice  in  its 
management.  He  has  the  disposal  of  the  moneys  collected 
from  seamen  for  hospital  purposes,  and  of  the  appropria- 
tions made  by  Congress  for  the  same  object,  and  it  is  not 
expended  in  private  hospitals  except  in  places  where  there 
is  no  public  institution.  He  merely  threw  out  this  sugges- 
tion as  a matter  for  consideration. 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854 


In  March,  1854,  Mr.  Fillmore  set  out  from  Buffalo  on  a 
long  tour  through  the  South.  He  was  called  on  to  speak 
at  many  of  the  cities  visited.  The  following  reports  of  his 
remarks  are  drawn  from  the  newspapers  as  indicated,  and 
are  usually  but  a fragment  or  abstract  of  what  was  said. 

At  Lexington,  Kentucky,  March  13th,  he  was  given  a 
civic  reception,  and  spoke  on  two  occasions.  On  the  same 
day  he  visited  Ashland,  and  the  tomb  of  Henry  Clay. 

AT  FRANKFORT. 

March  14th,  at  Frankfort,  among  other  hospitalities  Mr. 
Fillmore  was  given  a public  dinner,  at  which,  in  due  course, 
Col.  Thomas  L.  Crittenden  proposed  “the  health  of  Millard 
Fillmore,  ex-President  of  the  United  States.”  The  Frank- 
fort Commonwealth  reports: 

After  the  rapturous  applause  with  which  the  sentiment 
was  received  had  a little  subsided,  Mr.  Fillmore  arose  and 
in  a few  graceful  and  appropriate  sentences  acknowledged 
the  honor  that  was  done  him  upon  the  present  occasion,  and 
expressed  the  gratification  he  felt  in  the  kind  greeting  he 
had  received  here,  and  in  fact  wherever  he  had  been  in 
Kentucky.  In  response  to  Col.  Crittenden’s  complimentary 
allusion  to  his  Administration,  he  said  a great  part  of  what- 
ever credit  it  deserved  was  owing  to  the  assistance  of  the 
noble  men  who  sat  in  council  with  him,  and  that  in  regard 
to  his  brief  career  as  President  he  asked  no  other  favor  of 
friends  or  enemies,  but  that  its  history  should  be  correctly 


429 


430 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854 ■ 


written.  He  concluded  with  the  following  sentiment: 
“Frankfort — the  city  of  picturesque  beauty,  noble  patriot- 
ism, and  unbounded  hospitality.” 

SPEECH  AT  LOUISVILLE. 

At  a public  dinner,  March  15th,  at  Louisville,  Mr. 
Fillmore  spoke  at  length.  The  following  report  is  from  the 
Louisville  Journal  of  the  16th1 : 

Mr.  Fillmore  said  on  rising  that  he  felt  exceedingly  em- 
barrassed in  being  called  on,  for  the  first  time  in  his  life,  to 
address  an  audience  like  the  one  before  him,  and  that  he 
sincerely  hoped  there  was  no  “chid”  present  “takin’  notes,” 
but  that  what  he  should  utter  might  be  forgotten  with  the 
occasion.  He  was  at  a loss  to  understand  what  motive  could 
have  prompted  such  a great  and  unexpected  expression  of 
regard  on  the  part  of  the  citizens  of  Kentucky.  If  he  were 
in  the  actual  possession  of  the  power  which  it  was  once  his 
fortune  to  wield,  or  even  again  seeking  that  position,  he 
might  see  an  object  for  such  a manifestation,  but  here  I am, 
said  he,  neither  holding  nor  seeking  office,  with  nothing  as  a 
private  or  public  man,  which,  in  my  own  estimation,  should 
call  forth  such  a testimonial  as  this.  To  nothing,  said  he, 
can  I attribute  it  but  real  Kentucky  hospitality,  which  seeks 
an  object  whether  worthy  or  not,  and  lavishes  on  that  object 
its  own  generosity. 

Mr.  Fillmore  said  that  it  was  his  misfortune  to  be,  with- 
out his  solicitation  and  certainly  against  his  wishes,  called 
to  the  administration  of  the  Government.  He  had  not  even 
sought  the  nomination  for  the  Vice-Presidency,  and  none 
could  be  more  surprised  than  he  when  he  learned  that  he 

1.  The  Journal  prefaces  its  report  with  the  following:  “We  obtained  a 

full  report  of  the  speech  made  by  Mr.  Fillmore  . . . but  in  conformity 

with  what  we  understand  to  be  his  wish,  we  confine  ourselves  to  the  pub- 
lication of  a mere  sketch  of  what  he  said.  Judge  Nicholas,  who  was  designated 
by  the  committee  of  arrangements  to  make  a speech  calling  Mr.  Fillmore  out, 
dwelt  eloquently  and  powerfully  upon  the  vastly  important  service  which  the 
distinguished  guest,  as  President  of  the  United  States  in  1850,  rendered  to 
the  country  by  his  noble  stand  in  favor  of  the  memorable  compromise  of 
that  year.” 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854- 


431 


was  nominated.  It  was  only  ten  hours  before  General 
Taylor’s  death  that  he  had  any  thought  that  his  illustrious 
friend  was  in  danger.  The  knowledge  came  upon  him  like  a 
peal  of  thunder  from  a clear  sky.  He  felt  wholly  unprepared 
for  the  great  responsibilities  about  to  devolve  upon  him. 
Though  he  had  been  for  many  years  a politician,  he  could 
say  that  the  only  sleepless  night  he  ever  passed  on  account 
of  political  anxiety  was  that  on  which  General  Taylor  died. 
His  sleeplessness  arose  from  his  deep  feeling  of  the  weight 
of  duties  unexpectedly  devolved  upon  him. 

He  reviewed  during  the  hours  of  that  night  his  own 
opinions  and  life.  He  was  sensible  that  he  had  drunk  in 
with  his  mother’s  milk  and  had  cherished  from  his  youth  up 
a feeling,  even  a prejudice,  against  slavery.  He  endeavored 
to  look  upon  this  whole  country,  from  the  farthest  corner  of 
Maine  to  the  utmost  limit  of  Texas,  as  but  one  country,  the 
country  that  had  given  him  birth.  He  saw  in  the  gathering 
clouds  in  the  North  and  in  the  South  a storm  which  was 
likely  to  overwhelm  him,  and  he  feared,  his  country  also, 
but  he  took  the  Constitution  and  the  laws  as  his  only  guide. 
He  well  knew,  that  by  so  doing,  he  must  lose  the  friendship 
of  many  prominent  men  of  the  country,  especially  in  his  own 
State,  and  encounter  their  reproaches,  but,  said  he,  to  me 
this  is  nothing.  The  man  who  can  look  upon  a crisis 
without  being  willing  to  offer  himself  upon  the  altar  of  his 
country  is  not  fit  for  public  trust. 

On  the  night  of  General  Talyor’s  death  the  members  of 
his  Cabinet  presented  to  me  their  resignations.  I declined 
to  look  at  them,  first,  because  I deemed  it  respectful  to  the 
honored  dead  that  I should  not  consider  by  what  means  I 
was  to  carry  on  the  Government  until  he  was  decently  in- 
terred, and  secondly,  because  this  avalanche  of  responsibility 
had  fallen  upon  me  unprepared.  I desired  at  least  a few 
hours  to  reflect  on  what  it  was  my  duty  to  do.  Here  was  a 
Cabinet  selected  by  General  Taylor,  several  of  them  my 
personal  friends,  whom  I would  do  anything  in  my  power 
to  serve  short  of  endangering  the  peace  of  my  country.  I 
knew,  however,  that  their  policy  was  not  such  as  I could 


432 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854. 


approve.  I saw  that  the  executive  power  of  the  Government 
and  the  legislative  were  in  opposition  to  each  other,  and  that, 
while  this  state  of  things  continued,  peace  could  never  be 
restored.  The  question  therefore  presented  itself  to  me, 
Shall  I retain  this  Cabinet  or  select  a new  one  ? 

The  latter  course  was  adopted,  but  you  can  scarcely  con- 
ceive the  difficulties  of  the  position  in  which  this  decision 
placed  me.  When  our  Presidents  are  elected,  they  have 
three  or  four  months,  before  taking  their  offices,  to  select 
men  suitable  to  act  as  heads  of  department,  but  this  duty 
came  upon  me  in  half  a day.  I requested  the  members  of 
the  Taylor  Cabinet  to  stay  thirty  days  and  so  give  me  an 
opportunity  to  look  around  and  select  their  successors,  but 
they  respectfully  declined.  Thus,  while  the  storm  was 
coming  up  in  the  North,  and  in  the  South,  I was  suddenly 
called  to  administer  the  Government  without  a Cabinet  and 
without  time  to  select  one,  but,  thank  God,  I was  not  long 
in  this  situation.  I was  so  fortunate  as  to  obtain  a Cabinet, 
the  members  of  which  and  myself  always  agreed  in  opinion ; 
and,  in  all  our  acts,  we  acted  together.  In  that  Cabinet  your 
own  honored  Kentucky  was  honorably  represented. 

The  great  difficulty  remained.  The  question  arose,  what 
was  to  be  done?  In  Texas  and  New  Mexico  a civil  war  was 
threatened.  Texas  made  preparations  to  take  possession  of 
New  Mexico.  He  felt  it  his  duty  to  maintain  the  laws  of 
his  country.  One  of  those  laws  required  that  the  people  of 
the  territory  of  New  Mexico  should  be  protected.  As  a 
means  of  protection,  he  immediately  ordered  a portion  of 
the  army  and  munitions  of  war  to  the  frontier  of  Texas  to 
do  duty  there.  The  army  was  put  in  motion,  and  then,  and 
not  till  then,  did  Congress  act  upon  the  subject.  Texas  and 
New  Mexico  acquiesced  in  the  action  of  Congress. 

Mr.  Fillmore  spoke  of  the  adoption  of  the  compromise 
measures  of  1850,  and  especially  of  the  fugitive  slave  law. 
This  law,  he  said,  had  some  provisions  in  it  to  which  he  had 
objections.  He  regretted  the  necessity  of  its  being  passed  at 
all ; but  the  Constitution  required  the  giving  up  of  fugitive 
slaves,  and  it  was  not  for  him  to  decide  whether  this  was  a 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854. 


433 


wise  provision  of  the  Constitution — it  was  a bargain,  it  was 
a compact,  he  had  sworn  to  maintain  it,  and  he  would  do  so 
to  his  last  hour.  When  the  bill  came  to  him  from  the  two 
Houses,  in  the  midst  of  hurry  and  confusion  and  difficulties, 
he  examined  it,  and  a doubt  came  up  in  his  mind  whether  it 
was  not  unconstitutional  as  denying  the  right  of  habeas 
corpus  to  the  fugitive  slave.  He  referred  the  question  to  our 
accomplished  Kentucky  lawyer,  his  Attorney  General;  he 
gave  his  opinion  that  the  law  was  not  a violation  of  the 
Constitution,  and  therefore,  said  Mr.  Fillmore,  I gave  my 
signature  to  the  bill,  but  in  doing  so,  I drew  down  upon  my 
devoted  head,  as  I knew  I should,  the  vials  of  wrath  from 
abolitionism  and  free-soilism. 

Mr.  Fillmore  regretted  that  he  had  felt  called  on  to  say 
so  much  of  himself,  and  went  on  to  speak  of  those  who  stood 
by  him  in  the  great  struggle  of  1850.  He  said  that  he  would 
gladly  name  in  that  connection  many  living  persons,  not 
Whigs  merely,  but  Democrats,  as  true  patriots  as  ever  lived. 
This  work  of  pacification,  said  he,  was  by  no  means  the 
work  of  one  man  or  five  men  or  ten  men — the  crisis  was  one 
in  which  the  true  patriots  of  the  nation,  no  matter  what 
they  had  been  called,  Whigs  or  Democrats,  or  any  other 
name,  rose  above  all  personal  and  partisan  considerations, 
and  looked  only  to  the  good  of  the  country.  He  referred 
beautifully  to  the  noble  parts  taken  by  the  illustrious  dead, 
Mr.  Clay,  Mr.  Webster,  and  the  late  Vice-President  King. 

The  speaker  said  that  though  he  had  by  his  efforts  in 
behalf  of  the  compromise  lost  for  a time  the  confidence  of  a 
portion  of  his  fellow-citizens,  and  especially  in  his  own 
State,  he  loved  that  State  as  a dear  mother,  and  was  un- 
willing to  believe  that  he  had  proved  a recreant  son.  He 
trusted  that  the  excitement  of  the  moment  would  pass  away 
and  that  she  would  at  last  see  that  he  had  at  least  acted  with 
honest  intentions  if  he  had  not  acted  the  better  part.  But, 
fellow-citizens,  said  he,  let  me  refer  you  to  your  own  State. 
When  the  gathering  tempest  of  fanaticism,  abolition  fana- 
ticism, was  rolling  up  from  the  North,  an  equally  violent 
tempest  of  fanaticism,  secession  fanaticism,  was  rolling  up 


434 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854- 


from  the  South,  and  where  then  did  the  State  of  Kentucky 
stand?  She  stood  like  a rock  amidst  the  surges  of  the 
ocean;  she  stood  firm  and  unshaken,  the  pillar  of  the  Con- 
stitution.1 

AT  MOBILE. 

Proceeding  by  steamer  from  New  Orleans  to  Mobile, 
Mr.  Fillmore  was  met  down  the  bay,  April  7th,  by  a flotilla 
of  excursion  boats.  On  shore  a military  and  civic  reception 
was  held,  and  in  the  public  square  the  Mayor  tendered  to 
Mr.  Fillmore  the  hospitalities  of  the  city. 

In  response,  Mr.  Fillmore  said  he  was  taken  by  surprise 
at  the  unexpected  and  brilliant  reception  tendered  him,  and 
at  the  eloquent  remarks  of  the  Mayor  welcoming  him  to  the 
city,  and  he  hardly  knew  how  to  reply. 

He  spoke  of  having  just  sailed,  for  the  first  time,  upon 
the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  and  the  eagerness  with  which  he  looked 
for  a glimpse  of  the  shores  of  Alabama.  The  dense  fog, 
however,  of  the  morning  prevented  this  for  a long  time  and 
he  began  to  despair  of  obtaining  even  a view  of  the  city 
before  entering  it,  when,  as  if  the  blessing  of  heaven,  for 
some  reason  he  knew  not,  rested  upon  him  in  his  visit  here, 
the  thick  curtain  that  environed  them  was  suddenly  lifted, 
revealing  to  his  admiring  gaze  the  gallant  steamers  crowded 
with  manliness  and  beauty,  coming  to  welcome  him — the 
shipping  in  the  harbor,  with  banners  streaming  in  the  wind, 
and  soon  the  city  itself  in  all  its  loveliness.  He  referred 
very  happily  to  the  adventures  of  De  Soto  in  this  State,  par- 
ticularly to  his  account  of  the  aborigines,  whom  he  pro- 
nounced the  bravest  and  most  hospitable  of  men,  and  the 
women  of  the  tribe  of  Mobile  the  most  beautiful  of  their 
sex ; and  said  that  from  what  he  had  heard  and  witnessed 
of  his  white  brethren  and  their  wives  and  daughters,  their 
successors,  he  thought  the  mantels  of  the  aborigines  had, 

1.  The  report  concludes:  “His  eulogy  of  Kentucky  was  exceedingly  hand- 
some, and  this  portion  of  his  speech,  like  all  the  other  portions,  was  received 
with  the  most  enthusiastic  applause.  Few  public  speakers  ever  made  so  fine 
an  impression  upon  a Louisville  audience  as  he.” 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854- 


435 


in  these  respects,  fallen  upon  them.  He  then  referred  to  the 
remarks  of  the  Mayor,  respecting  his  public  service,  and 
said  that  he  claimed  little  credit  for  the  good  that  was  accom- 
plished. When  called  by  a mysterious  dispensation  of 
Providence  to  assume  responsibilities  from  which  he  would 
gladly  have  shrunk,  he  formed  the  resolution  to  take  the 
Constitution  for  his  guide,  and  no  matter  with  what  preju- 
dices or  friendships  it  might  conflict,  or  what  it  might  per- 
sonally cost  him,  to  do  his  duty  fearlessly  to  the  whole 
country.  He  dwelt  some  time  with  much  feeling  and  elo- 
quence upon  the  crisis  to  which  the  Mayor  referred.1 

REMARKS  AT  MONTGOMERY,  ALA. 

At  Montgomery,  Ala.,  acknowledging  a reception  by  the 
citizens,  Mr.  Fillmore  made  some  remarks  afterwards  much 
quoted  by  a portion  of  the  press  at  the  North.  This  speech, 
April  15th,  was  reported  by  the  Montgomery  Journal  as 
follows : 

Mr.  Fillmore  responded  in  a feeling,  appropriate  and 
eloquent  manner  to  the  reception  which  had  been  extended 
to  him  by  our  citizens.  He  confessed  that  he  was  over- 
powered by  the  demonstrations  of  regard  which  had  met 
him  at  every  step  in  his  journey  through  the  South.  He 
said  that  it  was  more  like  the  triumphal  march  of  a con- 
quering general,  than  the  reception  of  a private  citizen.  He 
felt  the  more  overpowered  by  the  manifestations  of  regard, 
because  he  was  satisfied  that  he  did  not  deserve  them.  He 
had  only  performed  his  duty,  and  said  that  next  to  the  appro- 
bation of  his  own  conscience,  the  assurance  that  his  course 
received  the  sanction  of  the  people,  was  a source  of  the 
highest  gratification.  He  alluded  to  the  circumstances 
which  surrounded  him  when  called  to  the  Presidency;  the 
excited  condition  of  the  country;  the  raging  storm  which 
had  been  engendered  by  opposing  factions ; to  the  fact  that 
he  had  been  born  and  educated  in  a free  State,  and  as  hav- 


1.  Abstract  of  speech  in  the  Mobile  Advertiser,  April  8,  1851. 


436 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854- 


ing  necessarily  imbibed  prejudices  against  the  institution  of 
slavery;  the  resolution  to  examine  for  himself  and  take 
the  Constitution  for  his  guide,  and  rising  above  all  narrow 
sectional  feeling  and  prejudice,  to  administer  the  Govern- 
ment with  a strict  regard  to  the  rights  and  interests  of  every 
section,  North,  South,  East  and  West;  “but/’  said  he,  “I 
should  feel  that  I had  dishonored  myself  if  I had  adminis- 
tered the  Government  for  the  benefit  of  the  South,  at  the 
expense  of  the  North.  I did  no  such  thing,  but  acted  hon- 
estly and  sincerely  for  the  benefit  of  the  whole  country.” 
He  briefly  alluded  to  his  course  in  regard  to  the  Texas  diffi- 
culty, which  at  that  time  assumed  a fearful  and  threatening 
aspect;  said  that  he  felt  it  to  be  his  duty  to  protect  the 
citizens  of  New  Mexico  from  the  threatening  invasion  of 
Texas,  and  while  he  knew  that  his  course  was  unpalatable 
to  the  South,  he  believed  it  to  be  his  sworn  duty  to  protect 
New  Mexicans  in  accordance  with  the  provision  of  our 
treaty  stipulations,  and  he  had  determined  to  do  so.  This, 
he  stated,  brought  about  the  compromise  measures  which 
had  so  happily  settled  the  whole  controversy. 

He  alluded  to  the  passage  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  law  as 
particularly  obnoxious  to  his  own  section,  and  said  he  knew 
that  his  approval  of  that  measure  would  lose  him  many 
friends,  but  the  Constitution  said  that  fugitives  from  labor 
must  be  given  up : and  as  he  had  sworn  to  support  the  Con- 
stitution, he  signed  the  bill  that  they  should  be  surrendered. 
Then  came  the  onerous  and  responsible  duty  to  enforce  the 
law.  We  could  not  know  or  understand  the  difficulties  which 
attended  the  discharge  of  this  duty,  but  he  had  sworn  to 
enforce  the  laws,  and  he  did  enforce  this,  notwithstanding 
he  had  been  threatened  by  the  fanaticism  which  raged  at 
the  North  against  it. 

AT  SAVANNAH. 

Mr.  Fillmore  arrived  at  Savannah,  Ga.,  April  21st,  where 
he  was  welcomed  in  a cordial  address  by  Mayor  Ward. 

In  reply  to  this  address  Mr.  Fillmore  expressed  his  gra- 
tification at  the  kind  welcome  with  which  he  was  greeted  and 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854 ■ 


437 


which  he  had  so  uniformly  received  throughout  the  South, 
proving  as  unexpected  to  him  as  it  was  gratifying.  He 
thanked  Mayor  Ward  for  his  complimentary  expressions, 
though  he  claimed  no  merit  for  anything  he  had  done  in  his 
late  position,  dictated  as  his  course  had  been,  by  a single  eye 
to  the  welfare  of  our  common  country. 

AT  CHARLESTON,  S.  C. 

[In  response  to  the  official  welcome:] 

Ex-President  Fillmore,  evidently  and  deeply  affected, 
replied  in  a most  happy  manner.  He  had  gratified  a long- 
cherished  wish  in  visiting  this  ancient  and  time-honored  me- 
tropolis, and  he  had  thereby  incurred  a new  obligation,  which 
he  had  gratefully  acknowledged  throughout  his  Southern 
tour. 

The  hospitalities  and  generous  welcome  he  had  every- 
where received,  were  none  the  less  grateful  to  him  from  the 
consideration  that  he  could  not  attribute  them  to  his  claims 
or  merits.  While  serving  in  the  Representative  branch  of 
Congress,  it  had  been  his  pleasure  to  be  associated  officially 
and  personally  with  representatives  of  South  Carolina,  and 
he  had  often  acknowledged  the  high  stand  occupied  by  the 
State  in  both  branches  of  Congress.  He  had  been  disposed 
sometimes  to  attribute  this  marked  pre-eminence  to  the  at- 
tention bestowed  on  education  here — at  other  times  he  had 
traced  it  back  to  the  generous  and  habitual  reliance  reposed 
by  the  State  in  her  great  men — a trait  which  he  considered 
among  the  most  noble  that  could  characterize  any  people. 

He  paid  a feeling  and  touching  tribute  to  the  genius, 
patriotism  and  purity  of  our  lamented  Calhoun  (whose 
statue  was  overlooking  the  ceremony  of  reception),  and 
stated  that,  whatever  differences  of  opinion  had  existed  as 
to  his  measures,  none  who  knew  him  ever  hesitated  to  accord 
him  these  merits  in  a paramount  degree.  The  tears  of  the 
whole  Union  swelled  the  tribute  which  Carolina  had  dropped 
on  the  grave  of  her  lamented  son  and  statesman.1 


1.  Report  in  Charleston  Courier,  April  27,  1854. 


438 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854- 


AT  AUGUSTA,  GA. 

Mr.  Fillmore  expressed  his  grateful  sense  of  the  kind 
reception  he  had  met  and  replied  in  most  appropriate  terms 
to  the  allusion  to  his  administration  of  the  Government. 
He  referred  in  complimentary  terms  to  the  State  and  city, 
their  progress,  etc.,  to  the  monument  (in  his  view)  to  the 
memory  of  the  signers  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
from  Georgia,  and  concluded  by  repeating  his  grateful  ac- 
knowledgments of  the  many  courtesies  extended  to  him.1 

AT  ATLANTA,  GA. 

At  Atlanta,  Ga.,  May  8th,  the  President  made  an  ad- 
dress of  which  the  following  is  preserved  by  the  Atlanta 
Republican: 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : That  being 
who  can  look  upon  a scene  like  the  one  before  me  unmoved, 
must  be  more  or  less  than  human.  The  cordial  welcome 
which  has  been  so  eloquently  expressed  by  you,  Mr.  Chair- 
man, though  it  finds  a warm  response  in  my  heart,  cannot 
be  expressed  in  language.  I had  heard  of  Atlanta  as  a 
beautiful  village,  in  the  center  of  your  State,  which  had 
recently  sprung  into  existence — but  until  I heard  the  elo- 
quence of  the  steam  whistle,  the  neighings  of  the  iron  horse 
of  your  railroads,  and  looked  on  the  multitude  congregated 
to  welcome  me,  I had  no  adequate  idea  of  the  extent  and 
population  of  your  city.  A thousand  thanks  for  the  cordial 
and  unexpected  welcome  extended.  And  although  it  may 
not  become  me  to  say  a word  about  your  State  policy  and 
home  affairs,  yet  I must  think  if  your  Legislature,  when 
they  come  to  vote,  could  look  on  the  fair  faces  and  bright 
eyes  of  the  beautiful  array  of  female  loveliness  before  me, 
they  would  not  hesitate  to  locate  the  State  Capitol  at  Atlanta. 
I am  hoarse,  as  you  perceive,  with  much  speaking.  But  I 
will  carry  the  remembrance  of  this  hour  not  only  to  my 

1.  Report  in  the  Augusta  Chronicle,  April  31st.  Mr.  Fillmore  was  at 
Nashville,  May  4th,  and  spoke,  but  no  report  of  the  address  is  found. 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854 . 


439 


Northern  home,  but  to  my  grave.  Accept  my  grateful 
acknowledgments  for  the  generous  welcome  extended  to  me. 

RECEPTION  IN  NEW  YORK. 

Arriving  in  New  York  City,  May  18th,  Mr.  Fillmore  was 
for  some  days  the  recipient  of  honors.  A delegation  from 
the  Clay  Festival  Association  visited  him  at  his  hotel,  and 
told  him  they  were  the  surviving  members  of  the  Clay  Asso- 
ciation formed  in  1844,  “in  the  day  of  Mr.  Clay’s  political 
adversity,”  and  they  had  always  considered  Mr.  Fillmore 
as  his  friend. 

Mr.  Fillmore  briefly  responded  and  said  he  was  taken 
quite  by  surprise  by  this  demonstration.  He  said  he  had 
met  with  many  of  the  friends  of  Henry  Clay  during  his 
recent  tour,  and  some  who  were  now  his  friends,  but  never 
before  avowed  it.  During  his  journey  he  had  visited  the 
home  of  Mr.  Clay,  and  dropped  a tear  over  his  grave.  He 
was  happy  to  see  the  Clay  men  of  his  own  State.  He  did 
not  desire  any  public  reception,  but  he  would  be  most  happy 
to  receive  all  his  friends.  He  was  happy  for  the  enthusiastic 
reception  he  had  received  from  the  South,  but  it  gave  him 
more  satisfaction  to  be  thus  welcomed  at  home.  He  felt 
proud  of  his  native  State,  although  he  would  receive  a citizen 
of  Texas  or  the  farthest  extremity  of  the  Union  with  the 
same  cordiality.  He  did  not  make  these  remarks  to  be  pub- 
lished, as  it  might  be  thought  to  be  a political  harangue.  He 
returned  his  sincere  acknowledgments  to  all.1 

A VISIT  TO  REFORMATORY  INSTITUTIONS. 

At  Randall’s  and  Blackwell’s  Islands,  New  York,  May 
19,  1854,  Mr.  Fillmore  inspected  the  institutions,  and  ad- 
dressed the  inmates  of  the  former  place : 

My  young  friends:  I take  great  pleasure  in  visiting 

this  institution  at  this  time,  and  although  I have  always  been 


1.  New  York  Tribune,  May  19,  1854. 


440 


THE  SOUTHERN  TOUR  OF  1854- 


proud  of  the  charitable  institutions  of  my  own  State,  I had 
no  anticipation  of  finding  here  so  much  intelligence  and 
happiness,  and  all  this  high  state  of  discipline  and  order. 
When  I saw  your  marching  I was  particularly  struck  with 
the  order  that  prevailed  in  your  ranks.  It  gave  evidence 
to  my  mind  that  you  were  disciplined  rightly,  and  that  you 
obeyed  your  instructions,  and  this  was  a gratifying  thought 
to  me.  During  my  occupancy  of  the  highest  public  station 
of  the  country  I have  often  had  occasion  to  be  present  at 
parades  and  have  reviewed  many  a regiment  that  did  not 
display  half  the  military  order  that  you  did  when  we  met 
you  this  morning.  Everything  seemed  in  its  proper  place, 
and  this  is  the  first  thing  a boy  should  learn — to  do  his  duty 
— and  then  he  may  expect  to  rise  to  usefulness,  and  perhaps 
to  eminence.  I am  happy  that  New  York  has  provided  such 
an  institution,  and  that  there  is  not  a place,  however  high, 
that  each  boy  in  this  institution  may  not  aspire  to ; and  I do 
sincerely  hope  that  we  may  be  spared  to  see  many  a boy 
now  here  filling  the  most  important  offices  in  this  city  or 
even  of  the  United  States.  This  would  be  a high  gratifica- 
tion for  me,  and  would  reflect  high  credit  on  that  noble  city 
that  has  so  wisely  provided  for  your  education.  I thank  you 
for  the  pleasure  you  have  given  me  in  witnessing  your 
exhibition. 


A TOUR  TO  THE  WEST 


Early  in  June,  1854,  Mr.  Fillmore  was  one  of  a numerous 
party  who  visited  Chicago  and  made  a tour  over  new  lines 
forming  a part  of  the  Rock  Island  railway  system.1  The 
excursionists  reached  St.  Louis  on  June  12th,  where,  as  at 
other  smaller  places,  an  enthusiastic  reception  was  given  to 
Mr.  Fillmore.  Arriving  by  steamboat,  he  was  met  at  the 
levee  by  Mayor  How  and  other  city  officials,  and  there  was 
the  usual  exchange  of  complimentary  speeches.  Later,  at 
the  Planters’  House,  responding  to  a speech  of  welcome  by 
Major  Uriel  Wright,  Mr.  Fillmore  said: 

SPEECH  IN  ST.  LOUIS,  JUNE  12,  1 854. 

Sir  : I confess  I am  taken  by  surprise  at  this  magnificent 
reception,  so  unexpected  to  me.  Were  I the  President  of  the 

1.  With  Mr.  Fillmore  on  this  famous  excursion,  were  the  Hon.  N.  K. 
Hall,  Hon.  George  R.  Babcock,  Millard  Powers  Fillmore  and  several  other 
gentlemen  from  Buffalo.  New  York,  Philadelphia  and  other  principal  cities 
were  represented.  The  programme  included  a trip  by  steamboat  up  the  Mis- 
sissippi to  St.  Paul.  At  Galena,  111.,  Mr.  Fillmore,  the  Hon.  John  A.  Dix  and 
others,  made  speeches.  Mr.  Fillmore  also  spoke,  in  acknowledgment  of  recep- 
tions tendered  him,  at  Dubuque,  la.,  and  at  St.  Paul,  Minn.,  where  a grand 
ball  was  one  feature  of  the  entertainment  and  Mr.  Fillmore  addressed  the 
dancers,  as  did  the  Hon.  George  Bancroft.  Mr.  Fillmore  in  the  course  of  his 
speech  likened  the  Mississippi  to  a tree;  the  Ohio,  the  Missouri,  the  Arkansas, 
and  other  tributaries,  its  branches,  with  New  Orleans  at  its  foot  naturally 
receiving  the  fruit  as  it  dropped  from  the  tree.  “Messrs.  Sheffield  and  Farnam, 
in  building  the  Chicago  & Rock  Island  Railroad,  have  set  up  a great  ladder 
with  its  base  at  New  York,  to  bear  the  fruit  safely  and  securely  to  another 
commercial  point.”  A meeting  of  the  excursionists  was  held,  June  9th,  on 
board  the  steamer  Galena,  attended  by  passengers  from  the  Golden  Era 
and  War  Eagle,  on  which  the  Mississippi  trip  was  made,  at  which  Mr.  Fillmore 
presided  and  spoke,  as  did  others,  in  acknowledgment  of  the  courtesies  they 
had  received  from  railway  and  steamboat  companies. 


441 


442 


WESTERN  TOUR , 1854- 


United  States,  or  even  a candidate  for  the  Presidency,  I 
could  in  a measure  conceive  of  the  honor  which  has  been  so 
generously  tendered  me ; but  I am  a private  citizen,  and 
come  among  you  as  such.  You  have  been  pleased  to  allude 
to  my  Administration  in  terms  of  commendation;  for  my 
official  action,  I claim  no  merit,  as  I determined  to  faithfully 
administer  the  Constitution  and  laws  regardless  of  all  con- 
sequences and  sectional  animosities  or  prejudices. 

I never  knew  the  resources  of  the  Mississippi  Valley  until 
my  visit  to  the  South.  I had  often  heard  of  its  boundless 
prairies  and  its  rich  lands,  so  well  and  peculiarly  adapted  to 
the  wants  and  necessities  of  man ; and  my  visit  at  this  time 
has  peculiarly  impressed  upon  me  its  great  importance. 
Coming  from  St.  Paul,  on  this  occasion,  from  the  far  North, 
I view  St.  Louis  not  only  as  the  commercial  emporium  of 
this  valley,  but  the  great  central  city  of  this  Union,  the  half- 
way house,  it  might  be  termed,  between  the  Atlantic  and 
Pacific  seaboards.  One  thing  is  yet  wanting  to  complete 
and  fill  the  measure  of  our  country’s  glory,  and  without  it 
our  broad  lands  and  great  resources  will  be  of  no  avail : It 
is,  that  iron  bands,  for  the  purpose  of  commercial  transit  and 
as  a conservative  element,  shall  connect  the  two  oceans. 
We  must  have  a railway  across  the  continent;  for  without 
this,  we  will  be,  and  feel,  like  the  old  colonies,  that  we  are 
too  far  away  from  the  central  power.  If  we  would  preserve 
this  Union  with  all  its  inestimable  blessings,  all  sections  of 
the  country  must  feel  that  they  are  one  common  brother- 
hood ; and  to  do  this,  space  must,  in  a measure,  be  annihil- 
ated, and  every  part  of  the  country  brought  in  contact  and 
fraternize  with  each  other. 

I congratulate  the  citizens  of  St.  Louis  upon  their  pros- 
perity, and  I may  be  pardoned  for  drawing  a contrast  with 
my  own  beloved  city  of  Buffalo.  A few  years  since,  we 
equalled  you  in  point  of  population,  and,  I say  it  not  in  envy, 
we  had  some  pretensions  to  being  your  rival ; but  you  took 
a sudden  leap  and  are  now  far  ahead  of  us. 

I congratulate  you  upon  your  commercial  importance — 
upon  the  enterprise  of  a population  which,  I am  told,  is  now 


WESTERN  TOUR , 1854. 


443 


near  one  hundred  and  twenty  thousand — upon  the  beauty  of 
your  public  buildings  and  the  taste  displayed  in  the  mag- 
nificence of  your  private  residences,  for  I confess  I had  no 
conception  of  these  things ; and,  what  is  more,  from  the 
vast  throng  that  now  surrounds  me  and  the  volunteers  with 
their  glittering  uniforms,  I see  you  have  the  spirit  and  the 
military  power  to  defend  and  protect  the  city.  Once  more, 
allow  me  to  tender  to  the  citizens  of  St.  Louis  my  heartfelt 
thanks  for  this  cordial  reception ; and  believe  me,  I shall 
ever  cherish  with  gratitude  the  generous  welcome  which  has 
been  extended  to  me  this  day. 


ENTERTAINED  IN  LONDON 


May  1 7,  1855,  Mr.  Fillmore  sailed  for  Liverpool.  He 
traveled  and  rested  in  Europe  for  a year,  returning  to 
America  in  June,  1856.  Being  in  London,  July  4,  1855, 
was  the  guest  of  honor  at  an  entertainment  given  by  George 
Peabody  at  Willis’s  famous  resort.  The  following  note  is 
from  an  English  source:1 

The  festivities  closed  with  Mr.  Fillmore  (late  President 
of  the  United  States)  rising,  and  saying  he  was  about  to 
propose  a toast,  in  which  he  felt  sure  every  one  present 
would,  with  one  accord,  join  him  in  drinking.  He  would 
propose  “The  health  of  our  generous  host.”  Mr.  Fillmore, 
with  an  intonation  of  voice,  that  at  once  attracted  the  atten- 
tion of  his  hearers,  described  Mr.  Peabody  as  a noble  speci- 
men of  American  enterprise,  and  of  whom  his  countrymen 
were  justly  proud.  Transplanted  to  British  soil,  he  still 
maintained  the  characteristics  of  his  country,  and  cherished 
for  her  the  fond  recollection  which  he  had  so  generously 
illustrated  on  this  day  of  our  national  independence.  With 
a beautiful  allusion,  he  pointed  to  the  eagle  at  the  end  of  the 
hall,  and  touchingly  described  his  gratification  at  the  oppor- 
tunity afforded  him  of  meeting  so  many  of  his  fellow-coun- 
trymen on  foreign  soil.  He  should  always  be  proud  to  join 

1.  “A  report  of  proceedings  at  an  entertainment  given  on  the  4th  of  July, 
1855,  by  Mr.  George  Peabody,  at  Willis’s  Rooms,  London,  on  the  occasion  of 
celebrating  the  79th  anniversary  of  the  Independence  of  the  United  States 
of  America  ...”  [London,  1855.]  4to,  pp.  4. 


444 


IN  LONDON. 


445 


in  celebrating  the  day  of  our  national  independence,  whether 
at  home  or  abroad.  Mr.  Fillmore  sat  down  amidst  the  most 
enthusiastic  cheering,  the  band  playing  “Auld  lang  syne.”1 

i.  Mr.  Fillmore  and  Mr.  Van  Buren  appear  to  have  been  in  the  House 
of  Commons  at  the  same  time;  for  John  Bright,  in  a speech  delivered  in  the 
House  at  the  time  of  Mr.  Fillmore’s  visit,  said:  “Only  on  Tuesday  night  the 

very  remarkable  circumstance  occurred — and  I think  the  House  will  be  of 
opinion  that  it  is  one  worth  notice — of  two  of  the  distinguished  men  being 
present  listening  to  the  debates  in  this  House  who  have  occupied  the  position 
of  President  of  the  United  States,  a position  I venture  to  say,  not  lower  in 
honor  and  in  dignity  than  that  of  any  crowned  monarch  on  the  surface  of 
the  globe,”  and  he  passed  on  to  a eulogy  of  the  United  States  and  some  sur- 
vey of  its  importance. 


End  of  Fillmore  Papers,  Volume  One. 
Buffalo  Historical  Society 
Publication  Series,  Volume  X . 


2290  0 ! 0 


V 


I 


DATE  DUE 


201-5503 

PRINTED  IN  U.S.A. 

BOSTON  COLLEGE 


